Contents
13
Introduction
1. Scope and Focus (p. 14). – 2. Theory and Method (p. 15). – 3. Organization of the
Volume (p. 16). – 4. Acknowledgements (p. 18).
PART 1
1. Language as Cognition and Communication
MODULE 1. Language, Mind, and Social Interaction (p. 24). – 1.1. Definition of
Linguistics (p. 24). – 1.2. Language and the Human Mind (p. 24). – 1.2.1. Text 1 .
Noam Chomsky on ‘Language and Mind’ (p. 24). – 1.2.2. Task 1. Sense Relations Synonyms (p. 25). – 1.2.3. Task 2. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 25). –
1.2.4. Theory: Focus on Language as Cognition (p. 26). – 1.3. Language and the
Human Society (p. 26). – 1.3.1. Text 2. M.A.K. Halliday on ‘Language Functions’ (p.
26). – 1.3.2. Task 3. Sense Relations - Antonyms (p. 27). – 1.3.3. Task 4. Reading
Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 27). – 1.3.4. Theory: Focus on Language as
Communication (p. 28). – 1.3.5. Task 5. Discussion: ‘Nativist’ vs. ‘Environmentalist’
Positions (p. 28). – 1.3.6. Texts 3-5. Perspectives on Competence (Chomsky,
Hymes, Gumperz & Levinson) (p. 29). – 1.3.7. Task 6. Reading Comprehension Multiple Choice and Summary (p. 30). – 1.4. The Experientialist Perspective (p. 30).
– 1.4.1. Text 6. R. Langacker on ‘Cognitive Grammar’ (p. 30). – 1.4.2. Task 7. Sense
Relations - Synonyms (p. 31). – 1.4.3. Task 8. Reading Comprehension - True/False
and Summary (p. 31).
MODULE 2. The Embodiment of English Sounds (p. 32). – 1.5. Synchronic and
Diachronic Studies of Language (p. 32). – 1.5.1. Theory: Saussure vs. Sweetser (p.
32). – 1.5.2. Text 7. M. Johnson on ‘The Experiential Embodiment of Meaning and
Image Schemata’ (p. 33). – 1.5.3. Task 9. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice
(p. 33). – 1.6. The Nature of English Phonetics (p. 34). – 1.6.1. An Experiential View
of Speech Sounds (p. 34). – 1.6.2. English Phonetics (p. 34). – 1.6.3. The Embodiment of English Consonant Sounds (p. 35). – 1.6.4. Task 10. Activating Image
Schemata through Consonant Sounds (p. 37). – 1.6.5. Consonant Allophones (p.
38). – 1.6.6. Text 8. H.G. Widdowson on ‘The Nature of Language’ (p. 39). –1.6.7.
Task 11. Discussion (p. 40). – 1.6.8. The Embodiment of English Vowel Sounds (p.
40). – 1.6.9. Task 12. Activating Image Schemata through Vowel Sounds (p. 42).
23
CONTENTS
MODULE 3. Language in Socio-cultural Contexts (p. 43). – 1.7. Language as Social
Identity (p. 43). – 1.7.1. Diatopic and Diastratic Variations (p. 43). – 1.7.2. Pidgin
and Creole Varieties (p. 44). – 1.7.3. Task 13. Discussion (p. 46). – 1.7.4. Text 9.
‘Caught in the Culture Gap’ (p. 46). – 1.7.5. Task 14. From Definition to Word (p.
47). – 1.7.6. Task 15. Comprehension Questions and Discussion on ‘Language Acculturation and Socio-ethnical Passing’ (p. 48). – 1.7.7. Task 16. Grammar Structures - Irregular Verbs (p. 50). – 1.7.8. Task 17. Grammar Structures - The Relative
Pronoun Who (p. 51). – 1.8. Movement and Position Schemata: A Cognitive View of
English Prepositions (p. 51). – 1.8.1. Prepositions: Physical/Experiential Interaction
with the Spatial Environment (p. 51). – 1.8.2. Task 18. Schema Divergences in
Pidgin/Creole Prepositions (p. 55). – 1.8.3. Phrasal Verbs and Compound Words:
Metaphorical/Experiential Interaction with the Social Environment (p. 55). – 1.8.4.
Task 19. Compound Words - Image Schemata in Mental Lexicon (p. 56). – 1.8.5.
Task 20. Phrasal Verbs and Idioms - From Concrete to Metaphorical Meanings (p.
56).
2. Concepts of Present and Past in English Discourse
MODULE 4. Grammar Dimensions of Present Simple and Perfect (p. 60). – 2.1.
Dimensions of the Verb Grammar: Semantics, Syntax, and Pragmatics (p. 60). – 2.2.
Verb Semantics: Present Tense and Simple/Perfect Aspects (p. 60). – 2.2.1. Tense:
Processes (p. 61). – 2.2.2. Aspect: Perspectives (p. 62). – 2.3. Verb Syntax: Present
Simple and Present Perfect (p. 64). – 2.3.1. Present Simple: Inflectional Node and
Movements (p. 64). – 2.3.2. Present Perfect: Finite Operator / Non-Finite Predicator
(p. 69). – 2.4. Verb Pragmatics: Present Simple and Perfect in Discourse (p. 70). –
2.4.1. Pragmatic Functions of Tense and Aspects (p. 70). – 2.4.2. Text 10. New
Labour on ‘Social Exclusion’ (quotations from Tony Blair, Harriet Harman, and a
European Union document) (p. 72). – 2.4.3. Task 21. Key-word Definitions (p. 72).
– 2.4.4. Task 22. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 73). – 2.4.5. Task 23.
Critical Discourse Analysis (p. 74). – 2.4.6. Task 24. Critical Focus on Sociolinguistic
Schemata: “Social Exclusion” Schema vs. “Street Culture” Schema (p. 74). – 2.4.7.
Task 25. Critical Focus on Sociolinguistic Schemata: “Rewarding Work” Schema vs.
“Exploitative Work” Schema (p. 75).
MODULE 5. Time-sequence: Past Simple and Perfect (p. 78). – 2.5. Syntax and
Semantics of the Past Simple (p. 78). – 2.5.1. Past Simple: Syntax (p. 78). – 2.5.2.
Past Simple: Semantics (p. 80). – 2.6. Syntax and Semantics of the Past Perfect (p.
81). – 2.6.1. Past Perfect: Syntax (p. 81). – 2.6.2. Past Perfect: Semantics (p. 83). –
2.7. Pragmatics of Past Simple and Perfect (p. 83). – 2.7.1. Text 11. ‘Why Unhappy
Childhood = Successful, Happy Life’ (p. 84). – 2.7.2. Task 26. Sense Relations Synonyms (p. 84). – 2.7.3. Task 27. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 85). –
2.7.4. Task 28. Summary (p. 85). – 2.7.5. Task 29. Standard Past-Simple and PastPerfect grammaticalization vs. West-African Pidgin and Creole pre-verbal markers
(p. 85).
MODULE 6. Word-forms and Pro-forms - Modifying, Defining, and Inquiring (p.
88). – 2.8. The Structure of Words: Morphology (p. 88). – 2.8.1. Free and Bound
Morphemes (p. 88). – 2.8.2. Derivational Morphology (p. 88). – 2.8.3. Inflectional
Morphology (p. 91). – 2.8.4. Compounding (p. 92). – 2.8.5. Task 30. Word Forma-
6
59
CONTENTS
tion - Morphological Analysis (p. 93). – 2.8.6. Morphemes, Allomorphs and Diagrammatic Iconicity (p. 93). – 2.8.7. Pro-forms: The Morpho-syntax of Personal,
Possessive, and Reflexive Pronouns (p. 94). – 2.8.8. Task 31. Nigerian Pidgin Pronouns (p. 97). – 2.8.9. Pragmatic Applications: Anaphora and Word-modification in
Discourse (p. 97). – 2.8.10. Text 12. ‘Tumult in Toyland’ (p. 98). – 2.8.11. Task 32.
Word Formation - Morphological Analysis (p. 99). – 2.8.12. Task 33. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 99). – 2.8.13. Task 34. Transfer Errors in Interlanguage
Use (p. 99). – 2.9. Relative and Indefinite Pronouns (p. 101). – 2.9.1. Defining Functions of Pro-forms (p. 101). – 2.9.2. Textual Functions of Who and Whom (p. 102). –
2.9.3. Task 35. Defining Professions (p. 103). – 2.9.4. Defining Functions of Who,
Which and That (p. 103). – 2.9.5. Text 13. ‘Don’t Wait For the Job Ads’ (p. 104). –
2.9.6. Task 36. Vocabulary Translation (p. 105). – 2.9.7. Task 37. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 106). – 2.9.8. Task 38. Gatekeeping Encounters (p.
106). – 2.9.9. Syntactic Structures of ‘Wh-?’ and ‘How?’ Interrogatives (p. 107). –
2.9.10. Task 39. Questionnaires in the Social Sciences (p. 110). – 2.9.11. Task 40.
Planning Interviews (p. 111).
3. Processes in Progress
113
MODULE 7. The Continuous Aspect in English Discourse (p. 114). – 3.1. Syntactic
and Semantic Dimensions of the Present and Past Simple Continuous (p. 114). –
3.1.1. Present Simple Continuous: Syntax (p. 114). – 3.1.2. Present Simple Continuous: Semantics (p. 117). – 3.1.3. Past Simple Continuous: Syntax (p. 118). – 3.1.4.
Past Simple Continuous: Semantics (p. 119). – 3.2. Syntactic and Semantic Dimensions of the Present and Past Perfect Continuous (p. 120). – 3.2.1. Present Perfect
Continuous: Syntax (p. 120). – 3.2.2. Present Perfect Continuous: Semantics (p.
122). – 3.2.3. Past Perfect Continuous: Syntax (p. 123). – 3.2.4. Past Perfect Continuous: Semantics (p. 124). – 3.3. The Continuous Aspect: Pragmatic Applications
(p. 125). – 3.3.1. Text 14. ‘The Growing Problem of Teenage Pregnancy’ (p. 125). –
3.3.2. Task 41. Vocabulary Translation (p. 125). – 3.3.3. Task 42. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 126). – 3.3.4. Task 43. Role Play - ‘A welfare
officer dealing with a teenage mother’ (p. 126). – 3.3.5. Task 44. Conflicting Schemata (p. 127). – 3.3.6. Text 15. ‘The Latest Spin on Best-Selling Gangsta Rap’ (p.
128). – 3.3.7. Task 45. Slang Vocabulary (p. 129). – 3.3.8. Task 46. Discussion Identifying Biased Schemata (p. 129).
MODULE 8. Mental Processes (p. 130). – 3.4. Syntactic and Semantic Dimensions of
Mental Processes (p. 130). – 3.4.1. Mental vs. Material Processes (p. 130). – 3.4.2.
Processes of Affection: Verbs of Feelings and Emotions (p. 131). – 3.4.3. Processes
of Cognition: Verbs of Mental Activity (p. 134). – 3.4.4. Processes of Perception:
Verbs of Senses (p. 135). – 3.5. Pragmatic Dimensions of Mental Processes (p. 137).
– 3.5.1. Statives vs. Performatives (p. 137). – 3.5.2. Text 16. ‘Online Education’ (p.
138). – 3.5.3. Task 47. Vocabulary Translation (p. 139). – 3.5.4. Task 48. Reading
Comprehension - True/False (p. 139). – 3.5.5. Task 49. Online ‘Interlanguage’
Classroom (p. 140). – 3.5.6. Task 50. Perception, Affection, and Cognition in Computer-Mediated Communication (p. 141).
MODULE 9. Past Enacting and Actions-To-Come (p. 144). – 3.6. Syntactic and
Semantic Dimensions of Verbs Taking Both ‘-ing NP’ and ‘to-Infinitive VP’ (p. 144).
7
CONTENTS
– 3.6.1. Try/Attempt: Conation (p. 144). – 3.6.2. Stop/Finish (p. 147). – 3.6.3. Remember/Forget (p. 148). – 3.7. Pragmatic Implications: Facts that are ‘actualized’
and ‘still to be actualized’ (p. 149). – 3.7.1. Presuppositions (p. 149). – 3.7.2. Text
17. ‘Amazon in Peril’ (p. 151). – 3.7.3. Task 51. Vocabulary Translation (p. 151). –
3.7.4. Task 52. Reading Comprehension - True/False Semantic Presuppositions (p.
152). – 3.7.5. Text 18. Noam Chomsky on ‘Neoliberalism in Brazil’ (p. 152). – 3.7.6.
Task 53. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice on Presuppositions and Pragmatic Appropriateness (p. 153).
4. Cognitive Positioning in Future Projections
MODULE 10. Future Processes (p. 156). – 4.1. Mood and Modality in English and
Italian Notions of ‘Future’ (p. 156). – 4.2. Present Simple and Continuous Forms of
Future Processes (p. 157). – 4.2.1. Notions of Future expressed by the Present
Simple (p. 157). – 4.2.2. Notions of Future expressed by the Present Continuous (p.
157). – 4.2.3. Notions of Future expressed by To Be Going To (p. 158). – 4.3.
Modalized Present Tense Expressing Future Processes (p. 159). – 4.3.1. Modal
Auxiliaries Shall and Will (p. 159). – 4.3.2. Future Simple with Modal Auxiliaries:
Syntax and Semantics (p. 160). – 4.3.3. Future Perfect with Modal Auxiliaries:
Syntax and Semantics (p. 162). – 4.3.4. Future Simple Continuous with Modal
Auxiliaries: Syntax and Semantics (p. 163). – 4.3.5. Future Perfect Continuous with
Modal Auxiliaries: Syntax and Semantics (p. 164). – 4.4. Pragmatic Dimensions of
the Future (p. 165). – 4.4.1. The Use of Future in Political Speeches: Critical
Discourse Analysis (p. 165). – 4.4.2. Text 19. Tony Blair on ‘Education: Leadership
in Government’ (p. 165). – 4.4.3. Task 54. Sense Relations - Synonyms (p. 166). –
4.4.4. Task 55. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 166). – 4.4.5. Task 56.
Critical Discourse Analysis (p. 167).
MODULE 11. Conditional Prospects (p. 169). – 4.5. Social/Psychological Proximity
and Distance: Modal Auxiliaries Should and Would as Tone/Style Markers (p. 169).
– 4.6. Modalized Conditional Processes (p. 170). – 4.6.1. Present (Simple) Conditional with Modal Auxiliaries: Syntax and Semantics (p. 170). – 4.6.2. Perfect
Conditional with Modal Auxiliaries: Syntax and Semantics (p. 171). – 4.7. Pragmatic
Dimensions of Conditional Forms (p. 173). – 4.7.1. Should and Would in Discourse
(p. 173). – 4.7.2. Text 20. Bill Clinton on ‘Education: A Challenge for the 21 st Century’ (p. 173). – 4.7.3. Task 57. Vocabulary Translation (p. 174). – 4.7.4. Task 58.
Reading Comprehension - True/False, Critical Discourse Analysis, and Translation
Equivalence (p. 174). – 4.7.5. Adjectives and Adverbs of Qualities and Manners in
the Register of Professional Prescriptions (p. 175). – 4.7.6. Text 21. ‘How Professional Are You?’ (p. 176). – 4.7.7. Task 59. Sense Relations - Synonyms (p. 176).
– 4.7.8. Task 60. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 177). – 4.7.9.
Patterns of Cohesion and Coherence in the Noun Phrase (p. 177).
MODULE 12. Experiencing Comparisons (p. 179). – 4.8. Orientational Comparatives
(p. 179). – 4.8.1. Comparative ‘Mental Spaces’ (p. 179). – 4.8.2. Comparative
Adjectival Forms: Syntax and Semantics (p. 180). – 4.8.3. Comparative Adverbial
Forms: Syntax and Semantics (p. 181). – 4.9. Superlatives (p. 182). – 4.9.1. Superlative Adjectival Forms: Syntax and Semantics (p. 182). – 4.9.2. Superlative Adverbial
Forms: Syntax and Semantics (p. 184). – 4.10. Pragmatic Uses of Comparatives:
8
155
CONTENTS
Focus on Hybrid Registers (p. 185). – 4.10.1. The Marketing of Social Services:
Rethinking Tenor, Field and Mode (p. 185). – 4.10.2. Text 22. ‘How to Get the Most
from Your GP’ (p. 186). – 4.10.3. Task 61. Vocabulary Translation (p. 186). – 4.10.4.
Task 62. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 187). – 4.10.5. The
Marketing of Psycho-educational Discourse: Rethinking Power Relations (p. 187). –
4.10.6. Text 23. ‘Comparing Drugs: The Facts that Young People Should Know’ (p.
188). – 4.10.7. Task 63. Vocabulary Translation (p. 189). – 4.10.8. Task 64. Reading
Comprehension - True/False (p. 189).
PART 2
5. Passive Voice vs. Active Voice in Specialized Genres
MODULE 13. Agents and Causation: Transitivity and Syntactic Movements (p. 194).
– 5.1. Introduction to Part 2: Transactional Genres and Interactional Styles (p. 194).
– 5.2. A Functional View of Active and Passive Voices of the English Verb: Syntactic
Structures (p. 195). – 5.2.1. Logical, Grammatical, and Psychological Subject:
Active/Passive Focus on Implicatures (p. 195). – 5.2.2. Schema Conceptualization
of Transitivity and Syntactic Movements (p. 198). – 5.3. The Semantics of Active and
Passive Voices in Material and Mental Processes (p. 201). – 5.3.1. Cognitive Meaning and Transitivity (p. 201). – 5.3.2. Agency and Causation: Material Processes in
Transitive and Ergative Systems (p. 204). – 5.3.3. Active and Passive Forms of Mental Processes (p. 208). – 5.4. Relational, Behavioural, Existential, and Verbal Processes (p. 210). – 5.4.1. Token and Value in Relational Processes (p. 210). – 5.4.2.
Possible Voice Options in Behavioural, Existential, and Verbal Processes (p. 215). –
5.4.3. Circumstances (p. 217). – 5.4.4. Relevance of Transitivity System to the Discourse Analyst (p. 219). – 5.4.5. Text 24. Extracts from (a) the EC Council Regulation No. 343/2003 and (b) the Schengen Treaty (p. 219). – 5.4.6. Task 65.
Active/Passive Transformational Movements and Creative Writing (p. 220).
MODULE 14. Passive and Active Voices in Specialized Registers (p. 221). – 5.5. Passive Voice and Discourse Depersonalization in Scientific Registers (p. 221). – 5.5.1.
Method: Critical Discourse Analysis Applied to Research Genres (p. 221). – 5.5.2.
Depersonalization in the Language of Science (p. 222). – 5.5.3. Text 25. ‘A Study of
Irradiated Bone’ (p. 223). – 5.5.4. Task 66. Vocabulary Translation (p. 224). – 5.5.5.
Task 67. Reading Comprehension - Vocabulary and Multiple Choice (p. 224). –
5.5.6. Task 68. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 225). – 5.5.7. Text 26.
‘Recent Medical Evidence for Torture in Sierra Leone’ (p. 225). – 5.5.8. Task 69.
Sense Relations - Synonyms (p. 226). – 5.5.9. Task 70. Reading Comprehension Vocabulary and Multiple Choice (p. 226). – 5.5.10. Task 71. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 227). – 5.5.11. Text 27. ‘A Study of 95 Sikh Refugees
Seeking Asylum in UK’ (p. 227). – 5.5.12. Task 72. Sense Relations - Synonyms/
Definitions (p. 228). – 5.5.13. Task 73. Reading Comprehension - Vocabulary and
Multiple Choice (p. 229). – 5.5.14. Task 74. Reading Comprehension - True/False
(p. 229). – 5.6. Passive/Active Voices and Audience Manipulation in the Registers of
Political Discourse (p. 230). – 5.6.1. Method: Critical Discourse Analysis Applied to
Political-Economic Argumentation (p. 230). – 5.6.2. Text 28. Kenneth Hudson on
9
193
CONTENTS
‘The Language of Modern Politics’ (p. 231). – 5.6.3. Task 75. Vocabulary - Irregular
Paradigms (p. 231). – 5.6.4. Task 76. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p.
232). – 5.6.5. Task 77. Critical Discourse Analysis - Discussion (p. 232). – 5.6.6. Text
29. Margaret Thatcher vs. Tony Blair on ‘The Welfare State’ (p. 233). – 5.6.7. Task
78. Vocabulary Translation (p. 233). – 5.6.8. Task 79. Reading Comprehension True/False (p. 234). – 5.6.9. Text 30. Daily Mail on ‘Blair’s Employment Policy’ (p.
235). – 5.6.10. Task 80. Vocabulary Translation (p. 235). – 5.6.11. Task 81. Reading
Comprehension - True/False (p. 235). – 5.7. Power Relations in the Language of
Medical Popularization (p. 236). – 5.7.1. Active Voice in Popularizing Medical
Discourse (p. 236). – 5.7.2. Text 31. ‘Could Therapy Work for You?’ (p. 237). – 5.7.3.
Task 82. Reading Comprehension - True/False (p. 238). – 5.7.4. First-Person Report
in Medical Case-Study: The Discourse on Mental Illness (p. 238). – 5.7.5. Text 32.
‘Living with Mental Illness: Frances’s Story’ (p. 238). – 5.7.6. Task 83. Comprehension Questions - Overlapping Material and Mental Processes (p. 239).
6. Modality in the Discourse of Intercultural Communication
MODULE 15. The Syntax and Semantics of Modal Verbs (p. 242). – 6.1. The Scope of
English Modality (p. 242). – 6.2. Syntactic and Semantic Structures of Can/Could
and May/Might (p. 243). – 6.2.1. Can/Could (p. 243). – 6.2.2. May/Might (p. 246). –
6.3. Syntactic and Semantic Structures of Must/Have to and Need/Dare (p. 249). –
6.3.1. Must/Have to (p. 249). – 6.3.2. Need/Dare (p. 252). – 6.4. Syntactic and Semantic Structures of Shall/Should/Ought to (p. 253). – 6.4.1. Shall (p. 253). – 6.4.2.
Should/Ought to (p. 254). – 6.5. Syntactic and Semantic Structures of Will/Would
(p. 257). – 6.5.1. Will (p. 257). – 6.5.2. Would (p. 258). – 6.6. Semantic Meanings
Determining Pragmatic Contexts in Intercultural Communication (p. 259). – 6.6.1.
Modalized Discourses within High and Low Context Cultures (p. 259). – 6.6.2. Text
33. ‘Big Business Blunders’ (p. 261). – 6.6.3. Task 84. Vocabulary Translation (p.
262). – 6.6.4. Task 85. Reading Comprehension: Multiple Choice (p. 263). – 6.6.5.
Task 86. Summary and Creative Writing (p. 264). – 6.6.6. Task 87. Syntactic/
Semantic Modality Mistakes in Intercultural Communication (p. 264).
MODULE 16. Deontic and Epistemic Modality (p. 266). – 6.7. Deontic Modality:
Semantic Sense and Pragmatic Use (p. 266). – 6.7.1. Halliday’s Model of Deontic
Modality as Modulation (p. 266). – 6.7.2. Deontic Modality: Semantic Implications
(p. 269). – 6.7.3. Commissive and Directive Types of Deontic Modality (p. 270). –
6.8. Deontic Modality: Discourse Applications (p. 276). – 6.8.1. Modulation as
Audience Manipulation (p. 276). – 6.8.2. Text 34. ‘Why the West Can’t Understand
the Arabs’ (p. 277). – 6.8.3. Task 88. Vocabulary Translation (p. 278). – 6.8.4. Task
89. Reading Comprehension: Multiple Choice (p. 279). – 6.8.5. Task 90. Comprehension Questions, Summary, and Role-playing (p. 279). – 6.8.6. Task 91. Modal
Rewriting (p. 280). – 6.8.7. Task 92. A Cognitive/Experiential View of Deontic
Modality (p. 281). – 6.9. Epistemic Modality: Semantic Sense and Pragmatic Use (p.
283). – 6.9.1. Halliday’s Model of Epistemic Modality as Modalization (p. 283). –
6.9.2. Epistemic Modality: Semantic Implications (p. 284). – 6.9.3. Judgement and
Evidentiality Types of Epistemic Modality (p. 286). – 6.10. Epistemic Modality:
Discourse Applications (p. 290). – 6.10.1. Modalization as Judgement Modelling (p.
290). – 6.10.2. Text 35. ‘Predicting Attacks’ (p. 291). – 6.10.3. Task 93. Vocabulary
10
241
CONTENTS
Translation (p. 292). – 6.10.4. Task 94. Reading Comprehension: Multiple Choice
(p. 293). – 6.10.5. Task 95. Comprehension Questions and Summary (p. 293). –
6.10.6. Task 96. A Cognitive/Experiential View of Epistemic Modality (p. 293).
7. Clause Relationships in Argumentative Discourse
297
MODULE 17. Coherence and Inference in Conditional Sentences (p. 298). – 7.1.
Semantic Coherence and Schematic Inference in Discourse (p. 298). – 7.1.1.
Textual/Contextual Coherence (p. 298). – 7.1.2. Inference and Cognition (p. 301). –
7.1.3. Task 97. Achieving Coherence by Inference Processes (p. 303). – 7.2.
Coherence in Conditional Sentences (p. 304). – 7.2.1. Conditional Sentences:
Semantic Inferences and Syntactic Structures (p. 304). – 7.2.2. Task 98. Conditional
Sentences - Pattern Practice (p. 306). – 7.2.3. Locution, Illocution, and Perlocution
in Conditional-based Argumentative Discourse (p. 307). – 7.2.4. Text 36.
‘Orthorexia - The New Eating Disorder’ (p. 307). – 7.2.5. Task 99. Cloze Text Multiple Choice (p. 308). – 7.2.6. Task 100. Vocabulary Translation (p. 308). – 7.2.7.
Task 101. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 309). – 7.3. Textual
Macrostructures (p. 310). – 7.3.1. The Macrorules of Summarization (p. 310). –
7.3.2. Task 102. From Microstructures to Macrostructure - Extensive Reading and
Summary on ‘Ethnic Nutrigenomics’ (p. 311).
MODULE 18. Clause Relationships in Social Argumentation (p. 314). – 7.4. Clause
Interdependency in Sociological Reports: Textual and Pragmatic Dimensions (p.
314). – 7.4.1. Focus on Defining and Non-defining Relative Clauses (p. 314). – 7.4.2.
Task 103. Relative Clauses - Pattern Practice (p. 315). – 7.4.3. Tactic Relations:
Parataxis, Hypotaxis and Embedding (p. 316). – 7.4.4. Text 37. Tony Blair’s Report
on ‘The Family’ (p. 318). – 7.4.5. Task 104. Vocabulary Translation (p. 318). – 7.4.6.
Task 105. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 319). – 7.4.7. Text 38. ‘Report on the British Community Care System’ (p. 320). – 7.4.8. Task 106. Vocabulary
Translation (p. 320). – 7.4.9. Task 107. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice
(p. 321). – 7.4.10. Text 39. Tony Blair on ‘The Third Way’ (p. 322). – 7.4.11. Task
108. Vocabulary Translation (p. 322). – 7.4.12. Task 109. Reading Comprehension Multiple Choice (p. 323). – 7.4.13. Task 110. Clause Relations - Creative-Writing
Applications (p. 324). – 7.5. Logical-Semantic Relations in Argumentative Discourse
(p. 325). – 7.5.1. Argumentative Text-types (p. 325). – 7.5.2. Interconnected Logicosemantic and Tactic Systems (p. 327). – 7.5.3. Paratactic Expansion and Projection
(p. 328). – 7.5.4. Hypotactic Expansion and Projection (p. 331). – 7.5.5. Embedding
(p. 334). – 7.5.6. Task 111. ‘Making Sense Out of the WTO’ - Identifying Paratactic
Expansion and Projection Relations (p. 337).
8. Intercultural Conversation Analysis
341
MODULE 19. Acts, Moves and Turns in Conversation (p. 342). – 8.1. Two Models of
Conversation Analysis (p. 342). – 8.1.1. Model 1. Discourse Frames Applied to
Conversation Analysis - Acts, Moves and Exchanges (p. 342). – 8.1.2. Model 2.
Ethnomethodology Applied to Conversation Analysis - Moves, Turn-taking and
Adjacency Pairs (p. 347). – 8.1.3. Text 40. ‘Educational Interaction in a Multicultural
11
CONTENTS
Classroom’ - Conversation-Analysis Application (p. 350). – 8.1.4. Task 112. Reading
Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 351). – 8.1.5. Task 113. Turn-taking Preference Structure and Critical Conversation Analysis (p. 352). – 8.2. Speech Acts in Conversation (p. 352). – 8.2.1. The Socio-cognitive Basis of Conversational Cooperation (p. 352). – 8.2.2. Communicative Intentionality in Speech Act Theory (p.
354). – 8.2.3. Conventional Intentionality: Performative Acts (p. 356). – 8.2.4. Text
41. ‘Speech Acts in a Cross-cultural Medical Encounter’ (p. 358). – 8.2.5. Task 114.
Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 359). – 8.2.6. Task 115. Speech Acts
and Critical Awareness (p. 359). – 8.3. Declarative and Procedural Knowledge of
Speech Acts (p. 360). – 8.3.1. Speech-Act Focus 1: Apologies (p. 360). – 8.3.2.
Speech-Act Focus 2: Requests (p. 363). – 8.3.3. Task 116. Creative Rewriting Speech Acts and Critical Awareness (p. 366). – 8.4. Reported Speech in Forensic
Reports (p. 366). – 8.4.1. Syntactic Transformations (p. 366). – 8.4.2. Forensic Applications (p. 368). – 8.4.3. Text 42. ‘A Witness’s Testimony’ (p. 369). – 8.4.4. Task
117. Vocabulary - From Definition to Word (p. 370). – 8.4.5. Task 118. Creative
Rewriting - Forensic Reports (p. 370).
MODULE 20. Spoken Discourse Analysis: Research Methods (p. 372). – 8.5. Research
Processes in Conversation Analysis (p. 372). – 8.5.1. Ethnography of Speaking and
Communication (p. 372). – 8.5.2. Synthetic and Analytic Approaches (p. 372). –
8.5.3. Heuristic and Deductive Empirical Research (p. 374). – 8.5.4. Research Plan,
Hypothesis and Rationale (p. 375). – 8.5.5. Qualitative-Descriptive and Quantitative-Experimental Research Methodologies (p. 376). – 8.5.6. Task 119. Diatopic/
Diastratic-Variation Analysis (p. 379). – 8.6. Methodological Applications (p. 380). –
8.6.1. Procedures for Data Collection (p. 380). – 8.6.2. Cross-cultural Unequal
Encounters: Data Collection (p. 381). – 8.6.3. Task 120. Introspective Verbal Report
(‘Think-Aloud’ Technique) (p. 381). – 8.6.4. Text 43. ‘A Job Interview’ (p. 382). –
8.6.5. Task 121. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 382). – 8.6.6. Task
122. Rewriting a Diastratic Variety (p. 383). – 8.6.7. Procedures for Data Analysis
(p. 383). – 8.6.8. Cross-cultural Cooperative Encounters: Data Analysis (p. 384). –
8.6.9. Task 123. Exploring Formality Variations (p. 385). – 8.6.10. Text 44. ‘An
Academic Encounter’ (p. 385). – 8.6.11. Task 124. Vocabulary Translation (p. 386).
– 8.6.12. Task 125. Reading Comprehension - Multiple Choice (p. 386). – 8.6.13.
Task 126. Equivalence in Translation (p. 387).
389
Conclusions
1. Retrospects: Reviewing the Objectives (p. 390). – 2. Prospects: Multicultural
Stances on Social Discourse (p. 391).
Keys
393
References
403
12
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
1. SCOPE AND FOCUS
This volume has evolved from a pedagogic research in Cognitive Linguistics applied to the
analysis of English discourse for the Social Sciences, conducted in an Italian academic
context. Its aim is to gradually introduce functional, cognitive-semantic, and pragmatic
concepts into the description of syntactic structures and apply them to the processes of
acquisition and use of English as a ‘lingua franca’ in social contexts of intercultural
communication. By the expression ‘intercultural communication’ it is not simply implied the
interaction between people from different cultures, languages, nationalities, or ethnic
groups. In fact, this expression is also meant to be inclusive of communication asymmetries
in: power relations, social, institutional, or professional status, as well as age, gender and
religion, all of which influence pragmatic uses within the boundaries of the same community. All such asymmetries often make social interactions difficult, if not impossible,
mainly because the interacting people have not developed common conceptual, ‘experiential’ systems (or ‘schemata’) allowing them to view and interpret communicative situations
in the same way. Consequently, communication failure may occur either when people do
not share the same native language (and so they have to resort to a ‘lingua franca’ to
communicate), or even when they do actually share the same native language, but not the
same ‘socio-cultural’ background. The need for experts in intercultural mediation operating
in such situations is thus becoming more and more urgent, particularly in today’s multicultural societies.
This is a need that the present volume intends to meet, as it has been primarily designed
to address university students interested in the use of specialized registers and varieties of
English in the professional domains of the Social Sciences. More specifically, this volume is
concerned with the uses of English as a ‘lingua franca’ within intercultural working contexts
in Italy, where students, as prospective welfare officers, educators, sociologists, psychologists, or experts in social, institutional or community mediation, are expected to interact
with local ethnic, socio-cultural, and linguistic minorities. In helping the achievement of this
professional aim, the forms and functions of the English language are investigated in
relation to authentic instances of written and spoken genres concerning a number of
discursive domains in the Social Sciences. Such domains range from socio-political, economic, and educational areas of debate in Great Britain and in the USA to transcriptions of
authentic cross-cultural conversations between speakers belonging to different ethnic
communities and often using dialectal or interlanguage varieties of English. This implies a
systematic analysis of the extent to which such genres, and the registers and dialects
actualizing them, may be influenced by the speakers/writers’ different cognitive strategies
and native pragmalinguistic uses in such a way as to determine the success or failure of
cross-cultural interactions in social practice. The underlying theoretical assumption, therefore, is a view of discourse focused on the socio-cognitive nature of communication,
emphasizing contextual and conceptual aspects of meaning which are not only determined,
but also challenged and renegotiated by the social relations and identities of the participants
in intercultural communication.
14
INTRODUCTION
2. THEORY AND METHOD
Particularly influential in the development of this rationale has been, on the one hand, the
cognitive-functional dimension of Halliday’s view of language as ‘social semiotics’, assuming that all discourse – and its pragmatic textualization into written or spoken registers –
is the socio-cultural outcome of an interaction between ‘ideational’ (cognitive) and
‘interpersonal’ (communicative) functions. On the other hand, Langacker’s notion of a
‘cognitive grammar’ that is ‘generative’ in an ‘experiential’ way – namely, in its accounting
for all the physical, biological, behavioural, psychological, social, cultural and communicative factors of human cognition – has also cogently contributed to the view of language
advanced in this volume, meant as a creative adaptation to the experiential constraints and
pressures of its own particular circumstances.
This presupposes the notion of ‘discourse’ as people’s pragmatic achievement of meaning in reference to a whole range of socio-cultural and psycho-physical contexts. As such,
this notion can also cast light on the process by which particular meanings and even sociocultural identities come to be attributed to an individual (or to a whole group) on the basis
of the language variety s/he uses within a multicultural society. For instance, it may provide
an understanding of how, in cross-cultural communication, ‘diatopic’ varieties of a language
(e.g., dialectal, pidgin and creole varieties, depending on geographical spread) often come
to be perceived as ‘diastratic’ varieties (i.e., determining meanings on the basis of their
speakers’ social status and ethnicity). This multicultural dimension of discourse, however,
may also explain the widespread need for the acquisition of a standardized language variety
recognized as a shared international ‘lingua franca’ (e.g., the Standard British/American
English).
Language acquisition – and particularly second-language acquisition – has conventionally concentrated on morpho-syntactic, lexico-semantic and phonetic patterns of a standardized language variety. In the approach proposed in this volume, these patterns remain the
basis of English language knowledge. However, the introduction of a principled method of
discourse analysis also requires students to focus on how to put this knowledge into
pragmatic action for the development of communicative skills, and how to achieve successful communication by ‘critically’ trying out these skills within specific socio-cultural contexts
of professional practice. A ‘critical view’ of discourse analysis is therefore systematically
encouraged in order to equip students with the intellectual means enabling them to discern
how semantic and syntactic choices in the construction of discourse may actually influence
its interpretation.
To help students achieve these aims, the volume has been designed in a modular and
flexible format so as to allow its principled use at different levels of linguistic-communicative competence (from the pre-intermediate to the advanced levels). For this purpose, the eight chapters, and the twenty modules within them, are all interrelated according
to a thematic and grammatical cross-reference plan. Moreover, the initial part of each
module ensures the gradual, accessible and contextual introduction of key concepts and
terms (emphasized in bold) from Cognitive Semantics, Transformational Syntax and Discourse Pragmatics. These concepts are then applied to the description of English grammatical structures in a systematic comparison with the equivalent Italian ones. The second
part of each module brings both key linguistic concepts and grammatical patterns to bear
pragmatically on the social topics in question. These are introduced by a number of selected
15
INTRODUCTION
extracts from authentic texts concerning relevant social issues, such as: immigration, social
policy, educational policy, social exclusion, youth culture, popular scientific discourse,
inter-ethnic conflicts and unequal encounters, among many others. Sets of ‘tasks’ are then
designed to engage students in a critical evaluation of ‘what is said and how it is said’ in
such texts. Students are encouraged to give reasons for their critical evaluations based on an
identification and description of relevant syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features.
Reasons should be logical and reveal competent use of the previously introduced key
concepts and appropriate linguistic terminology. Furthermore, ‘tasks’ provide suggestions
for social action projected into the contexts of students’ future work. The focus, in sum, is on
critical discourse awareness as a basis for effective social action.
3. ORGANIZATION OF THE VOLUME
On such action-theoretical grounds, therefore, Part One explores in detail some notions
from Cognitive Grammar and Schema Theory, and applies them to a number of fundamental
semantic, morpho-syntactic and phonetic patterns of the English language. The same cognitive ‘Experientialism’ that justifies the forms and functions of the examined grammatical
patterns is also applied to the critical interpretation of the pragmatic design shaping the
selected texts. Chapter One considers some relevant approaches to the description of
language, viewing it as the outcome of cognitive and communicative processes. After introducing the models advanced by Chomsky, Halliday, Hymes, and Gumperz and Levinson,
the chapter assesses their strength and weaknesses against the Experientialist model. This
model provides a basis for the description of English phonetic sounds and, then, of
prepositions (also viewed in their phrasal-verb co-texts), both regarded as the speakers’
conceptualization of physical and, then, socio-cultural (diatopic/diastratic) ‘embodiment’ of
certain ‘image schemata’ they have experientially developed over time within their minds.
The social effects of possible diverging schemata, reflected in the allophonic and, more in
general, the diatopic varieties of English, are explored in the pragmatic part of this chapter,
devoted to a discourse analysis on ‘culture gaps’.
Chapter Two examines the semantic notions of Present and Past Tenses matched with
the Simple and Perfect Aspects, marking the speaker’s perspective on present or past events.
Transformational explanations of syntactic movements, typical of the Chomskyan Minimalist
tradition, are here reinterpreted in an Experientialist key, showing how syntactic change is
determined by semantic motivations aimed at pragmatic effectiveness. The relevance of this
cognitive-grammar explanation to discourse pragmatics is then assessed in reference to the
critical analysis of socio-political texts, where the use of specific tenses and aspects often
serves the covert conveyance of particular ideological stances, making them pass for
universally acknowledged ones. The same explanation also applies to texts reproducing the
writer’s conceptualization of past events as a ‘time sequence’ that, as it is demonstrated, is
culture-relative and, thus, differently codified in different English varieties (also pidgin and
creole varieties). Finally, the chapter examines the construction of words and pro-forms,
again, from an Experientialist perspective, with a special emphasis on the cognitivesemantic motivations for change in the syllabic structure, which justify the iconic processes
involved in derivational and inflectional morphology.
16
INTRODUCTION
Chapter Three explores ‘processes in progress’, thus focusing on the semantic and
pragmatic role that the Continuous Aspect plays in linguistically rendering this experiential
perception of progression of actions or events. The emphasis here is also placed on the
possible effects of such a perception, which may be of an emotional kind (e.g., distress,
elation, urgency, and so on). The syntactic and semantic dimensions and the pragmatic
presuppositions of verbs expressing mental processes of cognition, perception and affection, or indicating, through different syntactic structures, facts that are ‘actualized’ or ‘still
to be actualized’ (i.e., ‘try/attempt’, ‘stop/finish’, ‘remember/forget’) also fall within this
context. Discourse applications, this time, are focused on the socio-political issues concerning the on-going changes in their natural environment, but also on the developing computer-mediated communication modes and their socio-cultural and cognitive impact on
educational discourse.
Chapter Four continues the cognitive-semantic and syntactic exploration of tenses and
aspects begun in Chapter One. This time the focus is on the way the English language
categorizes the perception of future actions or events, which is different from the Italian
grammaticalization of Future as a separate tense. Various syntactic modes for the expression
of future processes are then semantically analyzed, including the modalization of the Present
Tense by means of the auxiliaries ‘shall’ and ‘will’. This semantic analysis is then assessed in
terms of its pragmatic applications to socio-political discourse, concentrated on a critical
analysis of the ways by which politicians may rhetorically employ modal auxiliaries to
achieve their persuasive aims. The same explorative procedure applied to the notion of Future, is also adopted for the examination of the ways by which the English language expresses
the semantic notions of Conditional. This chapter ends with an exploration of the ‘mental
spaces’ underlying the cognitive perception and linguistic expression of comparatives and
superlatives, putting such perceptions into pragmatic practice when there is a need to
‘construct’ specialized discourses specifically aimed at the ‘marketing’ of social services or
psycho-educational messages. As the texts presented here illustrate, such a discursive
‘construction’ often reflects the fact that specialists, in formulating their persuasive messages,
need to question the established power relations between themselves and their receivers
(clients/patients) in order to make their discourse more accessible and acceptable. This may
imply a devising of novel hybrid registers that challenge the conventional parameters of
‘tenor’, ‘field’ and ‘mode’ so as to comply with the newly established power relations.
Part Two of this volume explores in a deeper way the Experientialist notion discussed in
Part One, focusing on how mental representations of processes of the world are rendered
differently into language according to the various experiential perceptions that speakers
have of such processes. Chapter Five, therefore, examines how the different transitive
conceptualizations of the English Active and Passive Voices are expressed by means of
different syntactic movements in the sentence-structure in such a way as to allow a
pragmatic focusing or defocusing of the Agent in a process. This pragmatic application of
the Transitivity System to discourse introduces a critical perspective on how texts are
produced according to different generic conventions conveying specific points of view.
Texts representing instances of different scientific genres (whose specificity is determined
by the frequency of different process types, such as mental, material, verbal, etc.), but
dealing with the same topic (‘medical evidence for torture’), are therefore proposed to focus
on the scientific convention of ‘depersonalization’ by means of the Passive Voice. Applied to
the registers of political texts, instead, the use of the Passive Voice may imply a relieving of
17
INTRODUCTION
the Agent’s responsibility in a process, thus ideologically manipulating the audience, as the
critical discourse analyses on some texts by a number of well-known politicians illustrate.
The Active Voice shaping the discourse of medical popularization, instead, has got a
different way of manipulating readers by directly, and often authoritatively, addressing
them. The discourse of mental illness, which confuses the mental, material and verbal
dimensions of processes is also examined here.
Chapter Six deals with English Modality, again from an Experientialist perspective. After
showing the semantic and syntactic equivalence between English and Italian ways of conceptualizing and expressing modal verbs, the attention focuses on the Deontic and Epistemic types of Modality applied to the discourse of intercultural and international miscommunication in business and foreign policy. Sweetser’s experiential view of how Deontic
and Epistemic modal meanings evolved over time is finally introduced.
Chapter Seven examines clause relationships in argumentative discourse, by concentrating on the cognitive dimensions of ‘coherence’ and ‘schematic inference’ which make
sense of the semantic patterns underlying the syntactic structures of conditional sentences.
Austin’s pragmatic notions of ‘locution’, ‘illocution’ and ‘perlocution’, as well as van Dijk’s
concepts of ‘micro-/macro-structures’ of discourse are also discussed here in relation to
conditional-based argumentative discourses dealing with topics about ‘eating disorders’ and
‘ethnic nutrigenomics’. Also Halliday’s functional view of ‘interdependency’ relations (i.e.,
parataxis, hypotaxis and embedding) and ‘logical-semantic’ relations (i.e., expansion and
projection) between the phrases and clauses of a sentence is here revisited under a cognitive
perspective and applied to the pragmatic construction of different stances in socio-political
texts about controversial international issues.
Chapter Eight focuses exclusively on spoken discourse and, more precisely, on intercultural conversation. In it, the two main models of Conversation Analysis – i.e., the structural model (framing conversation into ‘acts’, ‘moves’ and ‘exchanges’) and the ethnomethodological model (describing conversation in terms of turn-taking and adjacency
pairs), are applied to the analysis of a cross-cultural interaction taking place in an
educational setting. The socio-cognitive basis of Grice’s conversational cooperation,
together with Speech Act Theory are also discussed here in terms of underlying declarative
and procedural knowledge of speech act uses, in particular ‘requests’ and ‘apologies’. How
speech acts are syntactically transformed and pragmatically reinterpreted in reported speech
and, more precisely, in the context of forensic reports, represents another crucial subject of
discussion. This chapter ends with a survey of the research methods that ‘students as
ethnographers’ may find professionally useful in investigating social discourse (for example,
cross-cultural unequal or ‘gatekeeping’ encounters), collecting naturally-occurring data and
analyzing them by means of qualitative, quantitative or experimental methodologies.
Accordingly, synthetic and analytic approaches to heuristic or deductive research methods
are examined and, then, applied to a number of cross-cultural conversation samples.
18
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION
AND COMMUNICATION
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
Module 1
LANGUAGE, MIND,
AND SOCIAL INTERACTION
1.1. DEFINITION OF LINGUISTICS
Linguistics is the scientific study of human language. As such, it regards the ways in which
members of a particular discourse community conceptualize their experience, encode it into
a linguistic form, and then use that code in social interaction. The linguist Edward Sapir
(1949: 162) asserts: “language is a guide to ‘social reality’. Though language is not ordinarily
thought of essential interest to the students of social sciences, it powerfully conditions all
our thinking about social problems and processes”. This explains why the systematic study
of language necessarily regards both cognition (i.e., the way in which language structures
thoughts in the human mind) and communication (i.e., the way in which language serves
social interaction). Indeed, as we acquire language during childhood, we also discover:
a. our identity as individuals (when we use it to refer to ourselves and our ideas or
opinions), and
b. our identity as social beings (when we communicate with other people).
That is why Linguistics has a significant impact on different disciplines, such as: sociology,
cognitive psychology, anthropology, philosophy, language learning and teaching, neuroscience, artificial intelligence. Cognitive psychology, for example, is at the basis of the
psycholinguistic view developed by the famous linguist Noam Chomsky. Sociology, on the
other hand, informs the sociolinguistic view advanced by another outstanding linguist,
Michael Halliday. Let us begin by examining Chomsky’s cognitive point of view.
1.2. LANGUAGE AND THE HUMAN MIND
❍ 1.2.1. Text 1: Noam Chomsky on ‘Language and Mind’
Why study language? There are many possible answers, and by focusing on some I do not,
of course, mean to disparage others or question their legitimacy. [...] One reason for
studying language – and for me personally the most compelling reason – is that it is
tempting to regard language, in the traditional phrase, as ‘a mirror of mind’. [...] More
intriguing, to me at last, is the possibility that by studying language we may discover
abstract principles that govern its structure and use, principles that are universal by
biological necessity and not mere historical accident, that derive from mental characteristics of the species. A human language is a system of remarkable complexity. [...] A
normal child acquires this knowledge on relatively slight exposure and without specific
24
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
LANGUAGE
MODULE 1
AND THE HUMAN MIND
training. He can then quite effortlessly make use of an intricate structure of specific rules
and guiding principles to convey his thoughts and feelings to others, arousing in them
novel ideas and subtle perceptions and judgments. For the conscious mind, not specially
designed for the purpose, it remains a distant goal to reconstruct and comprehend what the
child has done intuitively and with minimal effort. Thus language is a mirror of mind in a
deep and significant sense. It is a product of human intelligence, created anew in each
individual by operations that lie far beyond the reach of will or consciousness.
(N. Chomsky, Reflections on Language, 1975: 3-4)
❍ 1.2.2. Task 1: Sense Relations – Synonyms
A synonym is a word that is similar in meaning to another word. Synonymy, therefore, expresses a sense
relation of equivalence between the meanings of two lexical words.
Examples:
(a) attempt – try; (b) select – choose
Notice that the first synonym in couples (a) and (b) is of Latinate origin (‘attempt’, ‘select’), whereas the
second one is of Germanic origin (‘try’, ‘choose’), which is a characteristic of English synonymy.
The following List A reproduces a series of words from Text 1. List B reproduces their synonyms. Please,
match each word with its corresponding synonym.
A:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
focusing
disparage
compelling
intriguing
remarkable
slight
effortlessly
convey
arousing
mirror
anew
reach
B:
a. irrepressible
b. easily
c. little
d. afresh
e. stimulating
f. concentrating
g. communicate
h. reflection
i. grasp
j. depreciate
k. fascinating
l. extraordinary
❍ 1.2.3. Task 2: Reading Comprehension – True/False
Decide if the following statements are true or false in reference to Text 1.
1. Chomsky is interested in language as a reflection of the cognitive processes of the mind. [T] [F]
2. A child needs a long time to acquire language. [T] [F]
3. Rules and principles of language are too simple and inadequate to express the intricate structure of
thought. [T] [F]
4. Language is generated by intelligence, but it is difficult to understand how this process takes place. [T] [F]
25
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
MODULE 1
LANGUAGE
AND THE HUMAN MIND
❍ 1.2.4. Theory: Focus on Language as Cognition
In Chomsky’s Transformational-Generative Grammar (Chomsky 1965, 1981), the aim of
Linguistics is not simply to focus on how language is structured. In fact, he (together with
other generative linguists – see Horrocks 1987; Radford 1988; Aarts 1997; Tallerman 1998;
Ouhalla 1999) is principally interested in understanding more about language in order to
understand more about the processes of the human mind. Chomsky starts from the observation that although different groups of people speak different languages, all human languages are similarly governed by common rules, or principles, that are universal. Every language has rules that govern pronunciation, word formation, and sentence construction, providing a means for making assertions or requests, asking questions, and so on. This means
that languages differ from each other only at the level of their surface structure, but their
deep structure is the same, reflecting the general rules of a universal linguistic system
typical of the human species. This universal linguistic system is a genetic endowment of all
human beings. Chomsky defines it as an innate Language Acquisition Device (LAD)
genetically programmed in the human brain. The LAD provides a series of common grammatical principles, or Universal Grammar (UG), and their realizations as variable parameters to be adapted to the varying ‘settings’ of the different languages. The presence of
the LAD in the human brain would explain why language development in children occurs so
easily and spontaneously, and does not require any explicit teaching of the grammar rules
on the part of the adults. Moreover, children are extremely creative in their use of language,
because they can say and understand words and sentences that they have never heard
before.
In Chomsky’s perspective, therefore, language is exclusively a cognitive, abstract
knowledge developing in the human mind completely detached from the social contexts in
which it is used. This, in fact, represents another way of looking at language – that is, as a
socially motivated system developed to allow social communication. Let us analyze this
different point of view on language as it is expressed by Michael Halliday.
1.3. LANGUAGE AND THE HUMAN SOCIETY
❍ 1.3.1. Text 2: M.A.K. Halliday on ‘Language Functions’
The particular form taken by the grammatical system of language is closely related to the
social and personal needs that language is required to serve. [...] Language serves for the
expression of ‘content’: that is, of the speaker’s experience of the real world, including the
inner world of his own consciousness. We may call this the ideational function [...] In
serving this function, language also gives structure to experience, and helps to determine
our way of looking at things [...]
Language serves to establish and maintain social relations: for the expression of social
roles, which include the communication roles created by language itself – for example the
roles of questioner and respondent, which we take on by asking or answering a question;
and also for getting things done, by means of the interaction between one person and
another. Through this function, which we may refer to as interpersonal, social groups are
26
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
LANGUAGE
MODULE 1
AND THE HUMAN SOCIETY
delimited, and the individual is identified and reinforced, since by enabling him to interact
with others’ language also serves in the expression and development of his own personality.
(M.A.K. Halliday, Language Structure and Language Function, 1970: 142-143)
❍ 1.3.2. Task 3: Sense Relations – Antonyms
An antonym is a word that is opposite in meaning to another word. Antonymy, therefore, expresses a sense
relation of opposition between the meanings of two lexical words.
Examples:
love – hate; swift – slow; ask – answer; questioner – respondent
List A reproduces a series of words from Text 2. List B reproduces their antonyms. Please, match each word
with its corresponding antonym.
A:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
closely
inner
gives
social
communication
delimited
enabling
development
B:
a. individual
b. prohibiting
c. isolation
d. outer
i. distantly
f. takes
g. regression
h. expanded
❍ 1.3.3. Task 4: Reading Comprehension – Multiple Choice
Decide which of the three options meant to complete each of the following statements is the right one in
reference to the meaning of Text 2:
1.
a.
b.
c.
The grammar of a language has developed:
to serve communication needs
to establish a precise linguistic form
to close the development of a language once and for all
2.
a.
b.
c.
The ideational function of language is important because:
it makes human beings use language with no consciousness
it encourages communication among human beings
it organizes experience in the mind and helps human beings to develop their own identity
3.
a.
b.
c.
The interpersonal function of language is important because:
it serves social relations and, consequently, communication
it is centred on the individual identity
it serves the mental discipline of personality development
27
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
MODULE 1
LANGUAGE
AND THE HUMAN SOCIETY
❍ 1.3.4. Theory: Focus on Language as Communication
In Hallyday’s Systemic-Functional Grammar (see Hallyday 1976, 1978, 1994/1985), the
purpose of Linguistics is concerned with the study of language as social semiotic, that is to
say, as a system of signs that have been developed to serve the communicative needs of people
living in a social context. In other words, Halliday (together with other systemic-functional
linguists – see, for instance, Morley 1985; Benson and Greaves 1988; Ventola 1991; Martin
1992) intends language not as a biological evolution of the human beings’ brain (as in
Chomsky’s theory), but as a socio-cultural evolution prompted by the human beings’ need
to communicate with each other within their own communities. This means that language
has evolved within a specific community in such a way that it fulfils three main functions:
a. the Ideational Function, concerned with people thinking with language in order to
interpret experience;
b. the Interpersonal Function, concerned with people acting with language in order to
achieve interpersonal communication;
c. the Textual Function, concerned with the linguistic organization of a message.
These functions, in Halliday’s view, are realized differently in different languages because
they are coded into semantic and syntactic structures that reflect the different ‘social
semiotic’ of different communities. Within each community, this semantic and syntactic code
(representing the ‘grammatical system’ of its language) allows the expression of the social
behaviour of people using it in various situational contexts. Within the grammatical
resources of their code, people are free to choose those structures that best convey their
expressive and communicative intents.
❍ 1.3.5. Task 5: Discussion: ‘Nativist’ vs. ‘Environmentalist’ Positions
1. What is the main difference between Chomsky’s (Text 1) and Halliday’s (Text 2) positions?
2. Do you agree with Halliday’s view, or with Chomsky’s view? (Please give reasons for your answer).
3. Do you think that these two views can be considered as complementary? (Give reasons for your answer).
In the following extract, Halliday summarizes his own and Chomsky’s views by defining them, respectively,
as “environmentalist” and “nativist” positions:
In the psychological sphere, there have recently been two alternative lines of approach to
the question of language acquisition. These have been referred to as the ‘nativist’ and the
‘environmentalist’ positions. Everyone agrees, of course, that human beings are biologically equipped with the ability to learn language, and that this is a uniquely human
attribute – no other species has it, however much a chimpanzee or a dolphin may be
trained to operate with words or symbols. But the nativist view holds that there is a specific
language-learning ability, distinct from other learning abilities, and that this provides the
human infant with a ready-made and rather detailed cognitive model of the structure of
language. Learning his mother tongue consists in adapting the patterns of whatever
language he hears around him into the structure which he already possesses. The
environmentalist view considers that language learning is not fundamentally distinct from
other kinds of learning; it depends on those same mental faculties that are involved in all
aspects of the child’s learning processes. Rather than having built into his genetic structure
28
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
MODULE 1
LANGUAGE
AND THE HUMAN SOCIETY
a series of universal categories of language, what the child has is the ability to process
certain highly abstract types of cognitive relation which are at the basis of the linguistic
system; the very specific properties of language are not innate, and therefore the child is
more dependent on his environment – on the language he hears around him, together with
the contexts in which it is used – for the successful learning of his mother tongue. In a
sense, therefore, the difference of views is a recurrence of the old controversy of nature
and nurture, or heredity and environment, in a new guise.
(Adapted from: M.A.K. Halliday, 1978, Language as Social Semiotic)
4. According to this extract, what are the main differences between the ‘nativist’ and the ‘environmentalist’
views of language acquisition?
5. What are your own motivations for studying the English language?
❍ 1.3.6. Texts 3-5: Perspectives on Competence (Chomsky, Hymes, Gumperz & Levinson)
In the following Text 3, Chomsky states that Linguistics should regard exclusively an abstract
knowledge of language, which he defines as competence. Then, he dissociates competence from the actual use of language, or performance. Contrary to this view, in Text 4 Dell
Hymes argues that language is not simply an abstract, idealized knowledge of rules, but it is
also the use of these rules to achieve communication (communicative competence). In
Text 5, Gumperz and Levinson claim that the rules of use in the various languages are
different because they reflect the different socio-cultural experiences of their users (linguistic relativity).
Text 3: Noam Chomsky on ‘Competence and Performance’
Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-listener, in a completely
homogeneous speech-community, who knows its language perfectly and is unaffected by
such grammatically irrelevant conditions as memory limitations, distractions, shifts of
attention and interest, and errors […] in applying his knowledge of the language in actual
performance. […] We thus make a fundamental distinction between competence (the
speaker-hearer’s knowledge of his language) and performance (the actual use of language
in concrete situations). […] In actual fact, performance obviously could not directly reflect
competence.
(N. Chomsky, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, 1965: 3-4)
Text 4: Dell Hymes on ‘Communicative Competence’
There are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be useless. […] The
acquisition of competence for use, indeed, can be stated in the same terms as acquisition
of competence for grammar. Children develop a general theory of the speaking
appropriate in their community, which they employ, like other forms of tacit cultural
knowledge (competence), in conducting and interpreting social life.
(D.H. Hymes, “On Communicative Competence”, in J.B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.),
Sociolinguistics, 1972: 281)
29
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
MODULE 1
LANGUAGE
AND THE HUMAN SOCIETY
Text 5: Gumperz and Levinson on ‘Linguistic Relativity’
Every student of language or society should be familiar with the essential idea of linguistic
relativity, the idea that culture, through language, affects the way we think, especially
perhaps our classification of the experienced world.
J.J. Gumperz and S.C. Levinson, “Introduction: Linguistic Relativity Re-examined”,
in J.J. Gumperz and S.C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, 1996: 1)
❍ 1.3.7. Task 6: Reading Comprehension – Multiple Choice and Summary
1. What is the view of ‘speech community’ that emerges from Texts 3-4-5, despite their theoretical
differences?
a. The three texts clearly convey the idea of a homogeneous speech community sharing the same
grammatical/communicative competence.
b. Only Texts 3 and 4 clearly convey the idea of a homogeneous speech community sharing the same
grammatical/communicative competence.
c. Only Text 5 clearly conveys the idea of a homogeneous speech community sharing the same
grammatical/communicative competence.
2. Can you summarize the notions of ‘competence’ emerging from each of these texts?
3. How would you relate the notion of ‘language use in social life’, expressed in Texts 4 and 5, and Halliday’s
notion of ‘language functions’ in Text 2?
1.4. THE EXPERIENTIALIST PERSPECTIVE
So far we have examined two linguistic theories that are considered as antithetical: the
formal-mentalist one, advanced by Chomsky’s Transformational-Generative Grammar, and
the functional-communicative one, informed by sociolinguistic theories of language use (see
Texts 4 and 5 above) and proposed by Halliday in his Systemic-Functional Grammar. Yet, a
more recent Cognitive-Functional approach to grammar, informed by the Experientialist
view in Cognitive Linguistics (see Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Sweetser 1990; Langacker 1991;
Wierzbicka 1992) have to some extent succeeded in bringing together these two theories
under a common rationale. To Cognitive-Functional linguists, language is systematically
grounded in human cognition since it is a conceptual system that emerges from people’s
everyday experience of their own physical and sociocultural environments. Let us examine
the Experientialist view expressed by the cognitive linguist Ronald Langacker.
❍ 1.4.1. Text 6: R. Langacker on ‘Cognitive Grammar’
Though agnostic on the question of innateness, and the extent to which linguistic structure
reflects special evolutionary adaptations, cognitive grammar does consider language to be
indissociable from other facets of human cognition. Only arbitrarily can language be
30
1.
LANGUAGE AS COGNITION AND COMMUNICATION
MODULE 1
THE EXPERIENTIALIST
PERSPECTIVE
sharply delimited and distinguished from other kinds of knowledge and ability. Rather, it
emerges organically from the interaction of varied inherent and experiential factors –
physical, biological, behavioral, psychological, social, cultural, and communicative –
each the source of constraints and formative pressures. Because many of these factors are
the same or very similar for all speakers, language structure evinces considerable
universality […]. At the same time, every language represents a unique and creative
adaptation to common constraints and pressures as well as to the peculiarities of its own
circumstances. It thus requires a full, explicit description that is nonetheless sensitive and
individually tailored.
(R.W. Langacker, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. II, Descriptive Application, 1991: 1)
❍ 1.4.2. Task 7: Sense Relations – Synonyms
List A reproduces a series of words from Text 6. List B reproduces their synonyms. Please, match each word
with its corresponding synonym.
A:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
organically
to evince
pressures
sharply
arbitrarily
agnostic
tailored
constraints
B:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
neatly
unbelieving
bounds
unpredictably
systematically
demands
to deduce
adapted
❍ 1.4.3. Task 8: Reading Comprehension – True/False and Summary
a. Decide if the following statements are true or false in reference to Text 6.
1. Cognitive grammar considers language as an innate capacity of human cognition, dissociated from all its
other functions. [T] [F]
2. Language is the result of people’s physical, psychological and sociocultural experience. [T] [F]
3. Some aspects of language are universally shared by all human beings. Some other aspects, instead, are
relative to the specific circumstances in which a particular language is used. [T] [F]
b. Could you please summarize in your own words Langacker’s position on the nature of language and, then,
state in which ways it differs from the positions held by, respectively, Chomsky and Halliday?
31
6.
MODALITY
IN THE DISCOURSE
OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
Module 15
THE SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS OF MODAL VERBS
6.1. THE SCOPE OF ENGLISH MODALITY
In the English language, Modality is a modification of the Indicative Mood, the only English
mood (apart from the Imperative), used to state facts. Modality, therefore, is not used to
state facts, but it is a non-factual pragmatic element which, in English, is grammaticalized in
its expression. In other languages, on the contrary, it can be expressed by other moods,
such as Subjunctive and Conditional. In our exploration of the semantics and pragmatics of
English Modality, we will adopt, again, Halliday’s (1994) Functional Grammar associated
with an experiential view of Cognitive Semantics (Langacker 1978; Sweetser 1991), since
they would give us the possibility of focusing on language use as cognition and social
action.
As already stated in the previous chapters, Halliday (ibidem) claims that using a language
means acting within its established semantic code which has evolved in the course of time
by being constantly informed by the cognitive and communicative functions of language. In
this way, the code has been reflecting the changing mental and social reality of its users, as
well as their variable communicative requirements. In the case of Modality, English
semantics has codified modal verbs as auxiliary verbs used to regulate (modulate and
modalize) requests for permission, injunctions of obligation, expression of willingness, or
predictions of possibility which, if expressed straightforwardly, may result, in English
conventional communicative code, too brusque (cf. Hermeren 1978; Palmer 1979, 1986;
Coates 1983; Hinkel 1995). This specific pragmatic peculiarity of English Modality may
explain why the English syntactic structure of modal verbs is so different from the Italian
structure. In Italian, modal verbs follow the normal inflection typical of lexical verbs (e.g., io
posso, tu puoi, egli/ella può, noi possiamo, voi potete, essi possono; io devo, tu devi, egli deve,
noi dobbiamo, voi dovete, essi devono). In English, on the contrary, their form is ‘defective’
with respect to the other ‘regular’ verbs as it remains invariable for all persons (e.g., I can,
you can, he/she can, we can, you can, they can; I must, you must, he/she must, we must, you
must, they must). This means that English modal verbs have not got the suffix -s to mark the
third-person singular (i.e., there is no such form as ‘he cans’). Likewise, they have got
neither a to-Infinitive form, nor a Gerundive ing-form like the other verbs. (i.e., there are no
such forms as ‘to can’ and ‘canning’). Moreover, the main verbs following modal verbs are
always in the form of the Infinitive without ‘to’. The only exceptions may be considered
Have to and Ought to if “to” is regarded as part of the Infinitive of the main verb that follows
(e.g., “[I ought/have] [to work]”, rather than “[I ought to / have to] [work]” – the latter form
being the conventionally accepted one).
Let us now begin our exploration of the syntactic structures of the English modal verbs,
which are: Can/Could, May/Might, Must / Have to, Need/Dare, Shall / Should / Ought to, Will/
Would. In our examples we will use “to finish” as the main verb following the modal verbs
and, as such, being ‘modalized’ by them. We will examine, however, only the verbal forms
242
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
THE SCOPE
OF ENGLISH MODALITY
in the Simple and Perfect Aspects. As for the Continuous Aspect, we may make reference to
its syntactic structures already discussed in Chapters Four (on Future and Conditional forms
with modal auxiliaries will/would and shall/should) and Five (on the Passive Voice). Its
exclusion from the present discussion on the syntax of modal verbs is motivated by the fact
that the contribution given by the Continuous Aspect to the sentence in which it occurs is
not simply syntactic or semantic, but principally pragmatic, as it adds the sense of progression to the represented process. In the following sections, instead, we need to closely
scrutinize the syntactic structures of the English modal verbs by specially focusing on the
basic semantic meanings they acquire when inflected in the forms of Present and Past
Tenses. More semantic and pragmatic meaning nuances of the English modal verbs will be
discussed in the following Module 16.
6.2. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC STRUCTURES OF CAN/COULD AND MAY/MIGHT
❍ 6.2.1. Can/Could
The basic semantic meaning of Can, and its correlated past form Could, can be translated with
the Italian lexical verb Potere (and also rendered by the English expression to be able to).
1. Can: Present Simple and Future Simple
The notions of Present Simple and Future Simple, applied to the modal verb Can, are
syntactically rendered into the same sentence-structure, as shown by the examples below,
whereas in Italian they are rendered into two distinct Tense structures, which are
respectively: “io posso” (Present) “io potrò” (Future)”. The implied semantic motivation for
this sameness of forms is clear: Can expresses the Agent’s present capability of performing,
in the future, the process expressed by the main verb. Hence, the English Active form “I can
finish that work” corresponds to the Italian Active forms “io posso finire / potrò finire quel
lavoro”. Indeed Can (like all the other modal verbs) represents the Inflectional Node (INode) setting the Tense (Present) of the sentence.
The only form reproduced below in its full conjugation (i.e., accounting for all the personal pronouns), is the Present/Future Simple Affirmative one, in (1), as it exemplifies the use
of all the other modal verbs whose sentence-structure is the same for all the persons. All the
other forms that shall follow will be represented, instead, only by the corresponding Active
and Passive versions of the first-person singular sentence-structure.
(1) Affirmative
a. Active
I can finish it
you can finish it
he/she/it can finish it
we can finish it
you can finish it
they can finish it
b. Passive
it can be finished
it can be finished
it can be finished
it can be finished
it can be finished
it can be finished
243
by
by
by
by
by
by
me
you
him/her/it
us
you
them
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
CAN/COULD
AND MAY /MIGHT
(2) Negative (two forms: can’t and cannot – but also can not)
a. Active:
I can’t/cannot finish it
b. Passive: it can’t/cannot be finished by me
(3) Interrogative
a. Active:
can I finish it?
b. Passive: can it be finished by me?
(4) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
can’t/cannot I finish it?
b. Passive: can’t/cannot it be finished by me?
2. Can: Present Perfect and Future Perfect
Also the Present Perfect structure of Can shares the same syntactic form with the Future
Perfect which, in itself, is a concept that does not exist in English, the implication being the
same outlined in 1. above – that is to say, of the Agent’s present capability for performing a
future process. Therefore, the English Active form “I can have finished that work”
corresponds to the Italian Active forms of “io posso/potrò aver finito quel lavoro (per la fine
della settimana – non l’ho ancora finito)”, [“I can have finished that work (by the end of this
week – I haven’t yet finished it)”] 1. (Italicized clauses within round brackets represent the
sense implications of sentences – cf. Levinson 1983: 177). However, the implication for the
‘Present meaning’ of this sentence, in both English and Italian, can also be this: “I can have
finished it (probably, in the past, but now I can’t remember – it does not specify if I finished
it)”. [“Io posso averlo finito (forse, in passato, ma ora non riesco a ricordare – non è specificato se l’ho finito)”]. Here are the forms of the Present/Future Perfect of Can:
(5) Affirmative
a. Active:
I can have finished it
b. Passive: it can have been finished by me
(6) Negative
a. Active:
I can’t/cannot have finished it
b. Passive: it can’t/cannot have been finished by me
(7) Interrogative
a. Active:
can I have finished it?
b. Passive: can it have been finished by me?
(8) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
can’t/cannot I have finished it?
b. Passive: can’t/cannot it have been finished by me?
1
Italian forms which may appear related in their syntactic structure to the forms exemplified above, have
instead different syntactic realizations in English. For instance: the Italian sentence “io ho potuto finire quel lavoro
(solo la scorsa settimana – l’ho finito)” can be rendered in English as: “I was able/managed to finish that work (only
last week – I finished it)”. On the other hand, the corresponding Future form “io avrò potuto finire quel lavoro
(qualche settimana fa, ma non ricordo con certezza – l’ho finito)” can be rendered in English as: “I think I finished
that work (some weeks ago, but I don’t remember for certain – I finished it)”.
244
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
CAN/COULD
AND MAY /MIGHT
MODULE 15
3. Could: Past Simple and Present Conditional
The Past Simple and the Present Conditional of Can share the same syntactic structure
introduced by its corresponding Past form: Could. This is indicative of the fact that in
English there is not any Conditional Mood as in Italian – in fact, to express the ability/
possibility to perform a process in the future, on some specific conditions, the English
language resorts to the ‘deep semantic structure’ expressing ‘unreal/hypothetical situations’
by means of the Past Tense. This is the “Tense of Fiction” which is assumed to be a deeplyrooted ‘semantic principle’ in human cognition since it often emerges spontaneously also in
languages that have set a specific syntactic parameter determining a Conditional form. Such
deep semantic structure is particularly evident in the language of Italian children’s play – as,
for instance, when they say: “let’s pretend that you were a pirate” (“facciamo che tu eri un
pirata” – cf. Rodari 1973: 163). Thus, it seems inherent in the human mind to cast hypothetical, unreal situations in past time, rather than in future time.
This explains why the two meaning implications of an English sentence like: “I could
finish that hard work” correspond in Italian to two different syntactic forms:
(a) Past Simple: “io potevo (riuscivo a) finire quel lavoro faticoso (in un giorno, quando
ero giovane – l’ho finito)”. [“I could finish that hard work (in one day, when I was
young – I finished it)”]
(b) Present Conditional: “io potrei (riuscirei a) finire quel lavoro faticoso (in due giorni
– non l’ho finito)”. [“I could finish that work (in two days’ time – I haven’t finished
it)”]
(9) Affirmative
a. Active:
I could finish it
b. Passive: it could be finished by me
(10) Negative (could not or couldn’t)
a. Active:
I couldn’t finish it
b. Passive: it couldn’t be finished by me
(11) Interrogative
a. Active:
could I finish it?
b. Passive: could it be finished by me?
(12) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “could I not?” or “couldn’t I?”)
a. Active:
couldn’t I finish it?
b. Passive: couldn’t it be finished by me?
4. Could: Past Perfect and Perfect Conditional
Also the Past Perfect and the Perfect Conditional of Can (Could) are represented in English
by the same syntactic structure, whereas in Italian they have two different forms corresponding to:
(a) Past Perfect: “io (dissi che) avevo potuto finire quel lavoro (solo il giorno precedente
– lo finii)”. [“(I said that) I could have finished that work (only the day before – I
finished it)” – with Could preceded by a verb in the Past Tense (said) to contextualize
it in the past time].
(b) Perfect Conditional: “avrei potuto finire quel lavoro (ieri – ma non ci sono riuscito)”
245
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
CAN/COULD
AND MAY /MIGHT
[“I could have finished that work (yesterday – but I didn’t manage)”]
(13) Affirmative
a. Active:
I could have finished it
b. Passive: it could have been finished by me
(14) Negative
a. Active:
I couldn’t have finished it
b. Passive: it couldn’t have been finished by me
(15) Interrogative
a. Active:
could I have finished it?
b. Passive: could it have been finished by me?
(16) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “could I not?” or “couldn’t I?”)
a. Active:
couldn’t I have finished it?
b. Passive: couldn’t it have been finished by me?
❍ 6.2.2. May/Might
The semantic meaning of May, and its correlated past form Might, correspond to the Italian
lexical verb Potere. Yet, differently from Can/Could, their basic sense implication is not
ability, but possibility. All the other meaning nuances of modal verbs, however, shall be
dealt with in Module 16.
5. May: Present Simple and Future Simple
The forms of the Present Simple and Future Simple of the modal verb May are syntactically
the same, whereas in Italian they are rendered, also in this case, into two distinct Tenses
informing two different sentence-structures. Thus, an Active English sentence like: “I may
finish that work” has two Italian equivalent translations: “io posso/potrò finire quel lavoro”,
representing, respectively, the Present and the Future notions of time. The motivation for
this identity in semantic concept and syntactic form between Present and Future has been
already discussed above, in 6.2.1. (sub-section 1.) with reference to Can, and it is also valid
for May, as well as for all the other modal verbs. May, in fact, expresses the Agent’s present
possibility of performing, in the future, the process expressed by the main verb. What
follows now is the series of Present/Future-Simple forms of May.
(17) Affirmative
a. Active:
I may finish it
b. Passive: it may be finished by me
(18) Negative (may not or mayn’t)
a. Active:
I may not finish it
b. Passive: it may not be finished by me
(19) Interrogative
a. Active:
may I finish it?
b. Passive: may it be finished by me?
246
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
CAN/COULD
AND MAY /MIGHT
(20) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “may I not?” or “mayn’t I?”)
a. Active:
may I not finish it?
b. Passive: may it not be finished by me?
6. May: Present Perfect and Future Perfect
Also the unique English form expressing both Present Perfect and Future Perfect corresponds to two Italian Active forms rendering, respectively, the notions of Present and
Future times. Hence, the two Italian Active forms of “io posso/potrò aver finito quel lavoro
(possibilmente per la fine della settimana – non l’ho ancora finito)”, are rendered in English
by the Active sentence: “I may have finished that work (possibly by the end of this week – I
haven’t yet finished it)”]. As with Can, also in this case, however, the implication for the
‘Present meaning’ of this sentence, in both English and Italian, can also be: “I may have
finished it (probably, in the past, but now I can’t remember – it does not specify if I finished
it)”. [“Io posso averlo finito (forse, in passato, ma ora non riesco a ricordare – non è specificato se l’ho finito)”]. Here, together with the Active form, is the sequence of all the other forms
of the Present/Future Perfect.
(21) Affirmative
a. Active:
I may have finished it
b. Passive: it may have been finished by me
(22) Negative
a. Active:
I may not have finished it
b. Passive: it may not have been finished by me
(23) Interrogative
a. Active:
may I have finished it?
b. Passive: may it have been finished by me?
(24) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
may I not have finished it?
b. Passive: may it not have been finished by me?
7. Might: Past Simple and Present Conditional
The notions Past Simple and the Present Conditional of May share, again, the same sentence-structure introduced by its corresponding Past form: Might. The cognitive motivations
underlying the identification of the notion of Conditional with the notion of Past in English
have already been discussed in 6.2.1. (sub-section 3.). Now, let us focus on the two meaning implications of an English sentence-structure like: “I might finish that work” corresponding in Italian to two different syntactic forms:
(a) Past Simple: “io (dissi che) potevo finire quel lavoro (Imperfetto: non è specificato se
l’ho finito)”. [“I (said that) I might finish that work (Imperfect Aspect: it is not
specified if I finished it)”] – with Might preceded by a verb in the Past Tense (said) to
contextualize it in the past time].
(b) Present Conditional: “io potrei finire quel lavoro (possibilmente in due giorni – non
l’ho finito)”. [“I might finish that work (possibly in two days’ time – I haven’t finished
it)”]
247
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
CAN/COULD
AND MAY /MIGHT
(25) Affirmative
a. Active:
I might finish it
b. Passive: it might be finished by me
(26) Negative (might not or mightn’t)
a. Active:
I mightn’t finish it
b. Passive: it mightn’t be finished by me
(27) Interrogative
a. Active:
might I finish it?
b. Passive: might it be finished by me?
(28) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “might I not?” or “mightn’t I?”)
a. Active:
mightn’t I finish it?
b. Passive: mightn’t it be finished by me?
8. Might: Past Perfect and Perfect Conditional
Also the Past Perfect and the Perfect Conditional of May (Might) are represented in English
by a unique syntactic structure. In Italian, on the contrary, they are represented, again, by
two different forms corresponding to:
(a) Past Perfect: “io (dissi che) potevo aver finito quel lavoro (e forse l’ho finito, non
ricordo – non è specificato se lo finii)”. [“(I said that) I might have finished that work
(and maybe I finished it, but I don’t remember – it is not specified if I finished it)” –
with Might preceded by a verb in the Past Tense (said) to contextualize it in the past
time]
(b) Perfect Conditional: “potrei aver finito quel lavoro (a. entro domani – ma non l’ho
ancora finito – oppure b. in passato – ma ora non ricordo)” [“I might have finished
that work (a. by tomorrow – but I haven’t yet finished it – or b. in the past – but now
I don’t remember”]
(29) Affirmative
a. Active:
I might have finished it
b. Passive: it might have been finished by me
(30) Negative
a. Active:
I mightn’t have finished it
b. Passive: it mightn’t have been finished by me
(31) Interrogative
a. Active:
might I have finished it?
b. Passive: might it have been finished by me?
(32) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
mightn’t I have finished it?
b. Passive: mightn’t it have been finished by me?
248
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
MUST/HAVE TO
AND NEED /DARE
6.3. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC STRUCTURES OF MUST / HAVE TO
AND NEED/DARE
❍ 6.3.1. Must / Have to
The semantic meaning of the English modal verb Must and the semi-modal verb Have to
corresponds to the Italian lexical verb Dovere. Must, however, is only inflected in the
Present Tense (also in this case, with Future implications). Have to, therefore, makes up for
the lack of Past Tense in Must, though there are significant meaning distinctions between
these two verbs, as the next Module 16 will outline.
9. Must: Present Simple and Future Simple
The Present-Simple form of Must is, also in this case, adopted to express the notion of
Future – the basic implication being that of a present obligation to perform, in the future, the
process conveyed by the main verb. Hence, the Present/Future Simple-notions of Must have
the same syntactic form – e.g., the Active sentence “I must finish that work”. Conversely, in
Italian the corresponding syntactic realizations of the same sentence are two – a Present one
and a Future one, respectively – i.e.: “io devo/dovrò finire quel lavoro”. These are all the
other Active/Passive forms of the Present/Future Simple of Must:
(33) Affirmative
a. Active:
I must finish it
b. Passive: it must be finished by me
(34) Negative (must not or mustn’t)
a. Active:
I mustn’t finish it
b. Passive: it mustn’t be finished by me
(35) Interrogative
a. Active:
must I finish it?
b. Passive: must it be finished by me?
(36) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “must I not?” or “mustn’t I?”)
a. Active:
mustn’t I finish it?
b. Passive: mustn’t it be finished by me?
10. Must: Present Perfect and Future Perfect
The Present Tense of Must can be associated not only with the Simple Aspect, as examined
above, but also with the Perfect Aspect. Also in this case, the Present Tense of Must has got
the double significance of Present and Future, as in “I must have finished that work (by the
end of this week – I haven’t yet finished it)”. In Italian, on the contrary, these two notions are
represented by two distinct syntactic forms, as in the corresponding sentences: “io devo/
dovrò aver finito quel lavoro (entro la fine di questa settimana – non l’ho ancora finito).
Similarly to the corresponding forms of Can and May, however, also in the case of Must the
implication for the ‘Present meaning’ of this sentence, in both English and Italian, can also
be: “I must have finished it (probably, in the past, but now I can’t remember – it does not
specify if I finished it)”. [“Io devo averlo finito (forse, in passato, ma ora non riesco a ricordare – non è specificato se l’ho finito)”].
249
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
MUST/HAVE TO
AND NEED /DARE
(37) Affirmative
a. Active:
I must have finished it
b. Passive: it must have been finished by me
(38) Negative
a. Active:
I mustn’t have finished it
b. Passive: it mustn’t have been finished by me
(39) Interrogative
a. Active:
must I have finished it?
b. Passive: must it have been finished by me?
(40) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
mustn’t I have finished it?
b. Passive: mustn’t it have been finished by me?
11. Have to: Present Simple and Future Simple
Have to can be defined as a semi-modal verb insofar as, on the one hand, it ‘modalizes’ the
meaning of the main verb by adding to it the implication of obligation (like Must). On the
other hand, however, differently from the irregular syntactic forms of the other modal verbs,
the syntax of Have to is regular as it takes the 3rd-person-singular suffix -s as well as a
different form (had) to signal the Past Tense.
Similarly to Must, also the Present-Simple form of Have to can express the notion of
Future. So that, for instance, the English expression: “I have to finish that work”, is rendered
in Italian in two distinct syntactic forms to convey the notions of Present and Future times –
as, respectively, in: “io devo/dovrò finire quel lavoro”. This is the series of Active/Passive
forms of the Present/Future Simple of Have to. As we can notice, with the exception of the
Affirmative structure, there are two alternative forms for all the other structures: the former
received from the British usage, the latter (with the addition of the auxiliary do) evolved
from the American use.
(41) Affirmative
a. Active:
I have to finish it
b. Passive: it has to be finished by me
(42) Negative (have/has not to and haven’t/hasn’t to, or don’t/doesn’t have to)
a. Active:
I haven’t to finish it / I don’t have to finish it
b. Passive: it hasn’t to be finished by me / it doesn’t have to be finished by me
(43) Interrogative
a. Active:
have I to finish it? / do I have to finish it?
b. Passive: has it to be finished by me? / does it have to be finished by me?
(44) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
haven’t I to finish it? / don’t I have to finish it?
b. Passive: hasn’t it to be finished by me? / doesn’t it have to be finished by me?
12. Have to: Present Perfect and Future Perfect
Also the Present and Future Perfect forms of Have to have got the same syntactic structure,
250
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
MUST/HAVE TO
AND NEED /DARE
as in the sentence: “I have to have finished that work (by the end of this week – I haven’t yet
finished it)”. Also in this case, in Italian these two notions are represented by two distinct
forms, as in the sentences: “io devo/dovrò aver finito quel lavoro (entro la fine di questa
settimana – non l’ho ancora finito). Here is the series of possible structures:
(45) Affirmative
a. Active:
I have to have finished it
b. Passive: it has to have been finished by me
(46) Negative
a. Active:
I haven’t to have finished it / I don’t have to have finished it
b. Passive: it hasn’t to have been finished by me / it doesn’t have to have been finished
by me
(47) Interrogative
a. Active:
have I to have finished it? / do I have to have finished it?
b. Passive: has it to have been finished by me? / does it have to have been finished by
me?
(48) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
haven’t I to have finished it? / don’t I have to have finished it?
b. Passive: hasn’t it to have been finished by me? / doesn’t it have to have been finished by me?
13. Had to: Past Simple
Had to is only a Past-Tense form with no Conditional implications. Hence, the meaning of a
sentence in the Simple Aspect, like: “I had to finish that work” may be rendered in Italian as
either a Simple or an Imperfect Aspect – as, respectively, in: “io dovetti/dovevo finire quel
lavoro”.
(49) Affirmative
a. Active:
I had to finish it
b. Passive: it had to be finished by me
(50) Negative (hadn’t to or didn’t have to)
a. Active:
I hadn’t to finish it / I didn’t have to finish it
b. Passive: it hadn’t to be finished by me / it didn’t have to be finished by me
(51) Interrogative
a. Active:
had I to finish it? / did I have to finish it?
b. Passive: had it to be finished by me? / did it have to be finished by me?
(52) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
hadn’t I to finish it? / didn’t I have to finish it?
b. Passive: hadn’t it to be finished by me? / didn’t it have to be finished by me?
14. Had to: Past Perfect
Also the Perfect Aspect associated to the Past-Tense form Had to does not convey any
implication of Conditional. In this case, the meaning of a sentence like: “I had to have
251
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
MUST/HAVE TO
AND NEED /DARE
finished that work (and I finished it)” has got only one equivalent translation into Italian: “io
avevo dovuto finire quel lavoro (e lo finii)”.
(53) Affirmative
a. Active:
I had to have finished it
b. Passive: it had to have been finished by me
(54) Negative
a. Active:
I hadn’t to have finished it / I didn’t have to have finished it
b. Passive: it hadn’t to have been finished by me / it didn’t have to have been finished
by me
(55) Interrogative
a. Active:
had I to have finished it? / did I have to have finished it?
b. Passive: had it to have been finished by me? / did it have to have been finished by
me?
(56) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
hadn’t I to have finished it? / didn’t I have to have finished it?
b. Passive: hadn’t it to have been finished by me? / didn’t it have to have been finished
by me?
❍ 6.3.2. Need/Dare
15. Need/Dare: Present Simple and Future Simple
Need and Dare can be translated into Italian as, respectively, Avere Bisogno and Osare.
These verbs are also known as semi-modals as they can have two syntactic patterns: the
modal one and the regular one. The use of modals Need and Dare, however, is restricted to
the Interrogative and Negative forms of the Present/Future Simple, whereas the Affirmative
one is regular as in the sentence: “I need to finish / dare to finish that work (I have not
finished it)”, which in Italian can be rendered either as a form of Present, or as a form of
Future, as respectively in: “io ho/avrò bisogno di finire quel lavoro (Need) / io oso/oserò
finire quel lavoro (Dare) (non l’ho finito)”. The following series of forms also shows that
Dare is an intransitive verb and, as such, it hasn’t got the Passive form.
(57) Affirmative (Regular)
a. Active:
I need to finish it / I dare to finish it (Modal exception: I dare say)
b. Passive: it needs to be finished by me
(58) Negative (Modal: need not or needn’t / dare not or daren’t)
a. Active:
I needn’t finish it / I daren’t finish it
b. Passive: it needn’t be finished by me
(Regular):
c. Active:
I don’t need to finish it / I daren’t finish it
d. Passive: it doesn’t need to be finished by me
(59) Interrogative (Modal):
a. Active:
need I finish it? / dare I finish it?
252
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MUST/HAVE TO
AND NEED /DARE
b. Passive:
(Regular):
c. Active:
d. Passive:
MODULE 15
need it be finished by me?
do I need to finish it? / do I dare to finish it?
does it need to be finished by me?
(60) Negative Interrogative (Modal. Inversion: “need/dare I not?” or “needn’t/daren’t I?”)
a. Active:
needn’t I finish it? / daren’t I finish it?
b. Passive: needn’t it be finished by me?
(Regular):
c. Active:
don’t I need to finish it? / don’t I dare to finish it?
d. Passive: doesn’t it need to be finished by me?
6.4. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC STRUCTURES OF SHALL / SHOULD / OUGHT TO
The semantic meaning of Shall, with its correlated past form Should, and Ought to
correspond to the Italian lexical verb Dovere. The meaning nuances of these verbs,
however, are different from the ones inherent in Must and Have to, as we will examine in
Module 16. Now, let us focus on the basic syntactic structures and semantic meanings of
these modal verbs.
❍ 6.4.1. Shall
16. Shall: Present Simple and Future Simple
Also the Present-Simple form of Shall has the semantic implication of Future – or rather,
similar to the modal verb Will, it is conventionally used to signal a future process expressed
by the main verb. Hence, the English Affirmative form “I shall finish that work” can be
rendered in Italian as either a Present or a Future sentence-structure, as in, respectively: “io
devo (sicuramente) finire / finirò quel lavoro (perché devo sicuramente finirlo)”.
(61) Affirmative
a. Active:
I shall finish it
b. Passive: it shall be finished by me
(62) Negative (shall not or shan’t)
a. Active:
I shall not finish it
b. Passive: it shall not be finished by me
(63) Interrogative
a. Active:
shall I finish it?
b. Passive: shall it be finished by me?
(64) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “shall I not?” or “shan’t I?”)
a. Active:
shall I not finish it?
b. Passive: shall it not be finished by me?
253
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
SHALL / SHOULD /
OUGHT TO
17. Shall: Present Perfect and Future Perfect
Shall used in a Present-Perfect sentence-structure has also the semantic implication of a
Future-Perfect form, as in: “I shall have finished that work (by Friday – I haven’t yet finished
it)”. In Italian, instead, we need again two structures to express the notions of, respectively,
the Present and the Future Perfect, as in: “io devo aver finito / avrò finito quel lavoro (entro
venerdì – perché dovrò averlo finito e non l’ho ancora finito)”.
(65) Affirmative
a. Active:
I shall have finished it
b. Passive: it shall have been finished by me
(66) Negative
a. Active:
I shall not have finished it
b. Passive: it shall not have been finished by me
(67) Interrogative
a. Active:
shall I have finished it?
b. Passive: shall it have been finished by me?
(68) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
shall I not have finished it?
b. Passive: shall it not have been finished by me?
❍ 6.4.2. Should / Ought to
18. Should: Past Simple and Present Conditional
The Past Simple form of Should has also got the semantic implication of the Present
Conditional, a Mood which is absent in English. The motivation for such an identity of forms
and meanings between the Past Simple and the Present Conditional has already been
introduced in 6.2.1. (sub-section 3). Here we need to explore the basic semantic meanings
of an English sentence-structure like: “I should finish that work” corresponding in Italian to
two different syntactic forms:
(a) Past Simple: “io (dissi che) dovevo finire quel lavoro (Imperfetto: non è specificato se
l’ho finito)”. [“I (said that) I should finish that work (Imperfect Aspect: it is not
specified if I finished it or not)” – with Should preceded by a verb in the Past Tense
(said) to contextualize it in the past time].
(b) Present Conditional: “io dovrei finire / finirei quel lavoro (perché dovrei finirlo e
non l’ho finito)”. [“I should finish that work (I haven’t finished it)” – without any verb
in the Past Tense preceding Should].
(69) Affirmative
a. Active:
I should finish it
b. Passive: it should be finished by me
(70) Negative (should not or shouldn’t)
a. Active:
I shouldn’t finish it
b. Passive: it shouldn’t be finished by me
254
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
SHALL / SHOULD /
MODULE 15
OUGHT TO
(71) Interrogative
a. Active:
should I finish it?
b. Passive: should it be finished by me?
(72) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “should I not?” or “shouldn’t I?”)
a. Active:
shouldn’t I finish it?
b. Passive: shouldn’t it be finished by me?
19. Should: Past Perfect and Perfect Conditional
The Past Perfect form of Should has, again, the semantic implication of the Perfect Conditional, as with Could and Might. The English syntactic form to express these two notions,
therefore, is the same, as in the following sentence: “I should have finished that work”. The
two corresponding Italian forms, instead, are:
(a) Past Perfect: “io (dissi che) dovevo aver finito quel lavoro (un anno fa, se ben ricordo – l’ho finito)”. [“(I said that) I should have finished that work (a year ago, if I
remember rightly – I finished it)” – with Should preceded by a verb in the Past Tense
(said) to contextualize it in the past time]
(b) Perfect Conditional: “dovrei aver finito quel lavoro (a. entro domani – ma non l’ho
ancora finito – oppure b. in passato – ma ora non ricordo)” [“I should have finished
that work (a. by tomorrow – but I haven’t yet finished it – or b. in the past – but now
I don’t remember”]
(73) Affirmative
a. Active:
I should have finished it
b. Passive: it should have been finished by me
(74) Negative
a. Active:
I shouldn’t have finished it
b. Passive: it shouldn’t have been finished by me
(75) Interrogative
a. Active:
should I have finished it?
b. Passive: should it have been finished by me?
(76) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
shouldn’t I have finished it?
b. Passive: shouldn’t it have been finished by me?
20. Ought to: Past Simple and Present Conditional
The subtle sense differences between Should and Ought to shall be discussed in Module 16.
Here we need to focus specifically on the basic semantic implications of this form,
exemplified by the sentence: “I ought to finish that work” which retains again both meanings
of Past Simple and Present Conditional. In Italian, instead, we need two different sentencestructures to express these two Tenses, as in:
(a) Past Simple: “(io dissi che) a. dovevo / b. dovetti finire quel lavoro (a. non si specifica
se l’ho finito / b. l’ho finito)”. [“I (said that) I ought to finish that work (a. it is not
255
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
SHALL / SHOULD /
OUGHT TO
specified if I finished it / b. I finished it)” – with Ought to preceded by a verb in the
Past Tense (said) to contextualize it in the past time]]
(b) Present Conditional: “io dovrei finire quel lavoro (non l’ho finito)”. [“I ought to
finish that work (I haven’t finished it)”].
(77) Affirmative
a. Active:
I ought to finish it
b. Passive: it ought to be finished by me
(78) Negative (ought not or oughtn’t)
a. Active:
I oughtn’t to finish it
b. Passive: it oughtn’t to be finished by me
(79) Interrogative
a. Active:
ought I to finish it?
b. Passive: ought it to be finished by me?
(80) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “ought I not to?” or “oughtn’t I to?”)
a. Active:
oughtn’t I to finish it?
b. Passive: oughtn’t it to be finished by me?
21. Ought to: Past Perfect and Perfect Conditional
These two semantic meanings of Ought to are again expressed by the same syntactic form,
exemplified by the sentence: “I ought to have finished that work”, whereas in Italian they are
rendered by two different structures, as in:
(a) Past Perfect: “io (dissi che) avevo dovuto finire quel lavoro (il giorno precedente – lo
finii)”. [“(I said that) I ought to have finished that work (the day before – I finished it)”
– with Ought to preceded by a verb in the Past Tense (said) to contextualize it in the
past time]
(b) Perfect Conditional: “avrei dovuto finire quel lavoro (ieri – ma non ci sono riuscito)” [“I ought to have finished that work (yesterday – but I didn’t manage to)”].
(81) Affirmative
a. Active:
I ought to have finished it
b. Passive: it ought to have been finished by me
(82) Negative (ought not to or oughtn’t to)
a. Active:
I oughtn’t to have finished it
b. Passive: it oughtn’t to have been finished by me
(84) Interrogative
a. Active:
ought I to have finished it?
b. Passive: ought it to have been finished by me?
(85) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
oughtn’t I to have finished it?
b. Passive: oughtn’t it to have been finished by me?
256
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
WILL/WOULD
6.5. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC STRUCTURES OF WILL/WOULD
The semantic meaning of Will, with its correlated past form Would, have the basic meaning
implication of volition, willingness, corresponding to the Italian lexical verb Volere. Let us
examine the basic semantic and syntactic structures of this last modal verb.
❍ 6.5.1. Will
22. Will: Present Simple and Future Simple
Like the other modal verbs examined so far, also Will expresses in a unique syntactic form
the two semantic meanings of Present and Future time, as in: “I will finish that work”. This
structure, in fact, expresses the Agent’s present willingness to perform in the future the
process expressed by the main verb (finish). In Italian, instead, there are two different
sentence-structures to express the same time-notions, as in the sentences “io voglio finire /
finirò quel lavoro (perché voglio finirlo)”.
(86) Affirmative
a. Active:
I will finish it
b. Passive: it will be finished by me
(87) Negative (will not or won’t)
a. Active:
I won’t finish it
b. Passive: it won’t be finished by me
(88) Interrogative
a. Active:
will I finish it?
b. Passive: will it be finished by me?
(89) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “will I not?” or “won’t I?”)
a. Active:
won’t I finish it?
b. Passive: won’t it be finished by me?
23. Will: Present Perfect and Future Perfect
The same identity of form and meaning between the Present Perfect and the Future Perfect
of Will can be found in the kind of sentence-structure like: “I will have finished that work”.
In Italian, this sentence may be rendered by the two distinct forms, as in: “io voglio aver
finito / avrò finito quel lavoro (perché vorrò averlo finito).
(90) Affirmative
a. Active:
I will have finished it
b. Passive: it will have been finished by me
(91) Negative
a. Active:
I won’t have finished it
b. Passive: it won’t have been finished by me
(92) Interrogative
a. Active:
will I have finished it?
257
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
b. Passive:
WILL/WOULD
will it have been finished by me?
(93) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
won’t I have finished it?
b. Passive: won’t it have been finished by me?
❍ 6.5.2. Would
24. Would: Past Simple and Present Conditional
Would is the Past-Tense correlative of Will. Like the other Past-Tense forms of modal verbs,
also Would incorporates the Conditional sense of a ‘future process that is possible only on
certain conditions’. In this case, the sense of the Past Simple and Present Conditional are
rendered by the same sentence-structure, like: “I would finish it”. In Italian, again, we need
two syntactic forms to express these two concepts, as in:
(a) Past Simple: “io (dissi che) volevo finire quel lavoro (Imperfetto: non è specificato se
l’ho finito)”. [“I (said that) I would finish that work (Imperfect Aspect: it is not
specified if I finished it or not)” – with Would preceded by a verb in the Past Tense
(said) to contextualize it in the past time]
(b) Present Conditional: “io vorrei finire / finirei quel lavoro (perché vorrei finirlo e
non l’ho finito)”. [“I would finish that work (I haven’t finished it)”].
(94) Affirmative
a. Active:
I would finish it
b. Passive: it would be finished by me
(95) Negative (would not or wouldn’t)
a. Active:
I wouldn’t finish it
b. Passive: it wouldn’t be finished by me
(96) Interrogative
a. Active:
would I finish it?
b. Passive: would it be finished by me?
(97) Negative Interrogative (Inversion: “would I not?” or “wouldn’t I?”)
a. Active:
wouldn’t I finish it?
b. Passive: wouldn’t it be finished by me?
25. Would: Past Perfect and Perfect Conditional
Once again we find the same English syntactic form, this time introduced by the modal verb
Would, to express two different concepts: Past Perfect and Perfect Conditional in a type of
sentence like: “I would have finished that work”. In Italian, the same concepts are expressed,
as usual, by two different sentence-structures:
(a) Past Perfect: “io (dissi che) avevo voluto finire quel lavoro (entro quella settimana –
ma non è chiaro se lo finii)”. [“(I said that) I would have finished that work (by that
week – but it is not clear if I finished it or not)” – with Would preceded by a verb in
the Past Tense (said) to contextualize it in the past time]
258
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
WILL/WOULD
(b) Perfect Conditional: “avrei voluto finire quel lavoro (ieri – ma non ci sono riuscito)”
[“I would have finished that work (yesterday – but I didn’t manage to)”] 2.
(98) Affirmative
a. Active:
I would have finished it
b. Passive: it would have been finished by me
(99) Negative
a. Active:
I wouldn’t have finished it
b. Passive: it wouldn’t have been finished by me
(100) Interrogative
a. Active:
would I have finished it?
b. Passive: would it have been finished by me?
(101) Negative Interrogative
a. Active:
wouldn’t I have finished it?
b. Passive: wouldn’t it have been finished by me?
So far we have examined the basic syntactic structures and semantic meanings of the English
modal verbs. Now, we need to contextualize them within special situations which often
require the use of modality to ‘regulate’ social relationships. Typically, these are situations
involving intercultural communication.
6.6. SEMANTIC MEANINGS DETERMINING PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
❍ 6.6.1. Modalized Discourses within High and Low Context Cultures
The choice of situations of intercultural communication to exemplify the use of English
modal verbs is justified by the very nature of this type of interaction, which encompasses
two crucial basic concepts: culture and communication.
There are many definitions of culture. Most are based on the idea that culture is a result
or implication of human beings’ interaction with the natural and social environment from
which certain common patterns emerge and are replicated, as ‘behaviour’ (e.g., “Dink culture” – the culture of many Western married couples with a “double income and no kids”),
2
Notice that concepts similar to those conveyed by the sentence: “I would have finished that work” may be
expressed, either in the Past Perfect or in the Perfect Conditional, by an alternative form: “I would have liked to have
finished that work”, implying respectively: (a) the sense of a past accomplishment: as in: “(I said that) I would have
liked to have finished that work (and I finished it)”, and (b) the sense of a past failure due to a lack of favourable
conditions, as in: “I would have liked to have finished that work (but I didn’t manage to finish it)”.
Apparently similar constructions with “Like”, but with totally different meaning implications, are represented by
the sentences: (c) “(I said that) I would like to have finished that work (by the following week – but it is not specified
if I finished it or not)”. [In Italian: “(dissi che) volevo aver finito quel lavoro (entro la settimana successiva – ma non
è specificato se ce l’ho fatta oppure no), and (d) “I would like to have finished that work (by tomorrow – and I might
be able to finish it)”. [In Italian: “vorrei aver finito quel lavoro (entro domani – e potrei riuscirci)”].
259
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
SEMANTIC MEANINGS
AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
‘style’ (e.g., “Hip-hop culture”), or ‘belief system’ (e.g., “Islamic culture”). However, Goodenough’s (1971: 22) definition of culture as “a body of knowledge shared by members of a
society as to standards of perceiving, believing, evaluating, and acting” is perhaps the most
appropriate one to introduce the cultural differences which play a crucial role in determining success or failure in cross-cultural interaction. This same definition, on the other
hand, might seem to support the widespread view that culture is prescriptive, in that it sets
a series of social norms to be observed by convention or tradition within particular
communities and, consequently, to be ‘imposed’ upon newcomers. Such a view would
establish specific cultural boundaries determined by notions of Nationality (or national culture), Language (giving expression to “national culture”), Ethnicity (marking it), Religion
(influencing it), Social Class (binding it), General or Specialized Education (defining it). This
prescriptive view of culture is therefore in conflict with other parallel views regarding cuture
as: (a) communicative, since it can be communicated to other people in the respect of their
different cultural values; (b) cumulative, since it is open to the addition of new ‘layers’ in
the course of time to the extent of changing the original patterns of behaviour; and (c)
dynamic, since it adapts itself to new situations and contexts.
Seen in this light, the connection between culture and modality becomes conceivable
only in relation to a notion of communication regarded as an interpersonal interaction by
means of a linguistic symbol system and, more specifically, in relation to a view of intercultural communication meant as the interpersonal interaction between members of
different groups. Such groups differ from each other not only in respect of the knowledge
shared by their members, but also in respect of their linguistic forms of symbolic behaviour.
Hence, the use of modality to regulate each other’s verbal behaviour becomes crucial. The
assumption is that sociocultural and pragmalinguistic differences among the participants in
intercultural communication represent the principal reason for misunderstanding and
“cross-cultural pragmatic failure” in interaction (Thomas 1983; Knapp et al. 1987; Kasper and
Blum-Kulka 1993). Modal verbs, therefore, especially when the English language is used as
a lingua franca, may help speakers to explore each other’s reactions and, thus, to learn how
to understand and respect the multicultural subtleties of its multipragmatic use (Guido
2001).
Let us consider, for instance, a situation of cross-cultural business transaction between
American and Japanese business people. Negotiation, in such circumstances, is characterized
by a fixed series of situational traits to which each group of negotiators attributes different
sociocultural and pragmalinguistic values. Hence, to the Trait:Goal American negotiatiors
would attribute the value of a “contract” whereas Japanese would focus more on the “relationship” value. The Trait:Attitude is “win/lose” for Americans and “win/win” for Japanese
business people, which is reflected also in the Trait:Team Organization, where there is “one
leader” for the American team and “consensus” for the Japanese, despite the fact that the
Trait:Personal Communication Style is “direct and informal” for the US negotiators and
“indirect and formal” for the Japanese ones. Crucially, the Traits:Time/Emotion Sense is “high”
as for the American team, whereas it is “low” as for the Japanese businessmen. Accounting for
such sociocultural and pragmalinguistic discrepancies in specific situations means learning
how to ‘modulate’ them by means of a conscious use of modality and, thus, determining the
success of the cross-cultural interaction.
Hofstede (1983) claims that often cross-cultural discrepancies are caused by such factors
as:
260
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
SEMANTIC MEANINGS
AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
(a) Power Distance – i.e., the extent to which people tolerate an unequal distribution of
power within an organization (e.g.: high tolerance in Latin America vs. low tolerance
in Scandinavia).
(b) Uncertainty Avoidance – i.e., the extent to which people tend to feel threatened by
uncertain, ambiguous or undefined situations (e.g.: Greece and Portugal, tolerating
uncertainty, vs. Singapore, feeling threatened by uncertainty).
(c) Individualism/Collectivism – i.e., collectivist societies have got a close knit social
structure, and emphasis is placed on “in” versus “out” group membership. In
individualist societies, the social structure is lose and individuals fend for themselves
(cf. the individualist USA vs. the collectivist Latin America).
(d) Masculinity/Femininity – i.e., the embodiment of feminine qualities such as nurturing, sharing, and interdependence is important in “feminine societies” (e.g.: Scandinavia), whereas aggression, assertiveness and display of wealth are important in
masculine societies (e.g.: USA, Saudi Arabia, etc.).
Hall (1985, 1990) ascribes such communication discrepancies to specific cultural differences
among nations, which he classifies in terms of High and Low Context Cultures. He points out
that:
1. in nations characterized by Low Context Cultures, messages are explicit because
information is contained in the words of communicative acts so that words and meanings
can be separated from the context in which they occur, and this is crucially regarded as a
guarantee for a direct, clear, and unambiguous communication;
2. in nations characterized by High Context Cultures, instead, messages are implicit
because communication is indirect because it includes a great deal of extra information,
such as the message sender’s values, positions, background, and associations. Moreover,
non-verbal communication is an important part of the communicative process insofar as
even the expressive manner in which the message is delivered is crucial in its interpretation.
Hall’s (1985) classification of the nations characterized by Low or High Context Cultures also
shows how such cultural characteristics are reflected in the languages used by people
belonging to the respective national groups. He therefore ranks the Swiss language as the
one informed by lowest context culture. This is followed by German, Scandinavian, and
American English languages. French, British English, and Italian are ranked midway between low and high context cultures. Then, Spanish, Latin American, African and, finally,
Arabian and Japanese languages are instead ranked among the languages informed by highcontext cultures. The implication of such a classification is that intercultural communication
may be extremely difficult if it occurs between national groups with discrepant degrees of
context cultures. Hence the importance of the use of modality to avoid defying with a too
straightforward communication style the other people’ cultural values and pragmalinguistic
codes.
❍ 6.6.2. Text 33: ‘Big Business Blunders’
Read the following text and underline all the structures containing Modal Verbs.
261
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
SEMANTIC MEANINGS
AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
MODULE 15
Cultural differences are the biggest problems for multinational companies. The failure of
managers to comprehend fully these disparities could lead to many international business
blunders. To avoid making blunders, a person must discern the difference between what
must be done, what must not be done, and what may or may not be done. For example,
shoes must be removed before entering many religious buildings in the world, but the
individuals doing so must not act as if they belong to that particular religion. If you want to
be effective in a foreign environment, you ought to understand the local culture. In India,
for example, it would be considered a violation of the sacred hospitality to discuss
business in the home or on social occasions. At the same time, if a businessman from India
offers “come any time,” he means it. In the United States this may simply be a polite
expression, but in India it must be considered as a serious invitation, so you must arrange
the time of the meeting. If no time is set, the Indian shall assume that the invitation has
been refused.
Even the rejection of a cup of coffee can cause big problems. While a very profitable
opportunity was being negotiated, a Saudi Arabian businessman friendly offered a cup of
coffee to a U.S. executive who innocently said that he would not take it. The American
executive was in a hurry but this type of rejection is considered as an affront there. The
Saudi felt offended and the negotiation process was less successful than it would have
been.
American managers have encountered similar problems trying to understand time
values in other cultures. One U.S. company lost a big contract opportunity in Greece
because its managers would have tried to impose on the Greek negotiators the American
way of setting time-limits for the meetings. American would have preferred the Greeks to
first agree to principles and then consider the detail. But the Greek negotiators ought to
have considered this time-limits insulting and deceptive. In fact, they would have preferred, instead, to consider every detail, regardless of the time this should have taken.
Gift-giving can also create problems. In Middle-East, for example, hosts would feel
insulted if guests bring food to their homes (liquor, of course, must not be given because it
is prohibited by the Islamic religion). In Latin America, cutlery or handkerchiefs should not
be given because these gifts imply a cutting off of a relationship or a tearful event. In Asia,
gifts should be given privately to avoid embarrassing the Asians, but they must be offered
publicly in the Middle East to reduce the impression of bribery.
(Adapted from: David A. Ricks, 1983, pp. 7-10)
❍ 6.6.3. Task 84: Vocabulary Translation
Match the following key-words from Text 33 in List A with their corresponding Italian translation in List B.
A:
a. blunders
b. multinational companies
c. failure
d. to lead
e. to avoid
f. to discern
g. shoes
h. to remove
B:
1. ambiente
2. negoziatori
3. vieni quando vuoi
4. togliere, rimuovere
5. agire
6. appartenere
7. errori grossolani
8. distinguere, discernere
262
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
SEMANTIC MEANINGS
AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
i. buildings
j. to act
k. to belong
l. foreign
m.environment
n. come any time
o. polite
p. to arrange
r. meeting
s. to cause
t. profitable
u. to be in a hurry
v. rejection
w. negotiators
x. time-limits
y. to agree
z. details
aa. deceptive
bb. regardless
cc. gift
dd. Middle-East
ee. hosts
ff. guests
gg. food
hh. liquor
ii. cutlery
jj. handkerchiefs
kk. to cut off
ll. relationship
mm. tearful
nn. to embarrass
oo. bribery
9. scarpe
10. condurre
11. evitare
12. fallimento
13. educato
14. compagnie multinazionali
15. straniero
16. edifici
17. senza badare, incurante
18. avere fretta
19. ingannevole
20. decidere, organizzare, fissare
21. dono
22. incontro
23. padroni di casa
24. causare
25. rifiuto
26. lucrativo
27. imbarazzare
28. alcolici
29. corruzione
30. limiti di tempo
31. dettagli
32. posate
33. ospiti
34. relazione
35. cibo
36. accordarsi
37. fazzoletti
38. Medio Oriente
39. troncare
40. lacrimoso, doloroso
❍ 6.6.4. Task 85: Reading Comprehension: Multiple Choice
Decide which of the three statements is the right one in reference to Text 33.
1. Cultural differences are the biggest problems for multinational companies because …
a. managers understand disparities very well and use them to their advantage.
b. managers often fail to understand the local culture and make many unintentional business blunders.
c. managers must always remove their shoes before starting business negotiations.
2. In India, it would be considered a violation of the sacred hospitality …
a. to discuss business in the United States.
b. to go to the house of an Indian businessman after his polite invitation.
c. to discuss business at home and to avoid a visit after an invitation.
263
6.
MODALITY IN THE DISCOURSE OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
SEMANTIC MEANINGS
AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
MODULE 15
3. When an American executive refused the offer of a cup of coffee from a Saudi Arabian businessman …
a. their business negotiation did not proceed so productively as it would have been.
b. their business negotiation proceeded successfully and in a hurry.
c. their business negotiation proceeded more friendly.
4. One U.S. company lost a big contract opportunity in Greece because …
a. U.S. managers would have preferred to impose on Greeks time-limits and a general agreement on
principles.
b. U.S. managers agreed they would insult Greeks regardless of the time this should have taken.
c. U.S. managers were deceived by Greeks.
5. Gift-giving can also create problems, as for example …
a. in the Middle-East, where guests would feel insulted if hosts offer food and alcohol in their homes.
b. in Latin America, where cutlery or handkerchiefs should not be given because they anticipate a breaking
of a relationship or a sad event.
c. in Asia, where gifts must be offered publicly to reduce the impression of bribery, and in the Middle East,
where gifts must be given privately to avoid embarrassing the receivers.
❍ 6.6.5. Task 86: Summary and Creative Writing
1. In your own words, make a two-sentence summary of each paragraph of Text 33.
2. Write a self-help guide for business people dealing with international negotiations, by using the
intercultural mistakes outlined in Text 33 – or other similar ones you might know (e.g., explain what they
“can or cannot do”, “must or mustn’t do”, etc., using the structures of modal auxiliary verbs outlined so far).
❍ 6.6.6. Task 87: Syntactic/Semantic Modality Mistakes in Intercultural Communication
The following dialogue reproduces an exchange (classroom-simulation data from M.G. Guido) between a
female Italian trainee welfare officer (WO) and a newly immigrated Jordanian woman (JW). WO explains to
JW her rights and duties in the Italian society. Both use English as the lingua franca for their interaction.
Please, correct all the syntactic and semantic mistakes in WO’s use of English in general and English modal
verbs in particular:
(a) WO: I will inform you of the way of behaviours and tradition in Italy. In first time, you
shall know that the Italian law concerning that the woman have not submit, woman have
equal opportunities like men and, at last time, that your children must to go to public
schools, but you could know that in these schools mustn’t to be taught the Koran.
(b) JW: I know this. My children know that they must pray five times a day, this is one of the
laws of our religion.
(c) WO: I think that is important for you to know Italian law, Italian Family Law, okay?
(d) JW: That’s right.
(e) WO: Now, here law is separated by religion, in fact one of the most important law is
that the husband must not to repudiate her wife, or must not to punishment the wife for
adultery, or not have many wife.
(f) JW: Yes, our men can marry other women, but my husband and I agreed on monogamy.
We can divorce three times in our life – after, you must not marry again.
264
6.
MODALITY OF THE DISCOURSE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
MODULE 15
SEMANTIC MEANINGS
AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXTS
(g) WO: I will also say you that in Italy women must not to cover the head with the foulard,
and you can put every dress.
(h) JW: No, I can wear it here! It’s a sign of my faith. God invites the woman to cover her
head because she has to respect her own dignity and modesty.
(i) WO: Okay. But you could to know that your daughter must also to go to same school
together with boys, and your daughter have same work opportunities, same future like
boys.
(j) JW: That’s right. Our religion is not against career for women.
1. Compare your corrected version of this exchange with the version reproduced in the Key Section at the
back of this volume.
2. Who is the speaker belonging to a Low Context Culture, and who is the one belonging to a High Context
Culture? (Please, give reasons for your answer).
3. Which of the two speakers in this exchange is making a prescriptive use of her culture? The Italian
welfare officer (WO)? The Jordanian woman (JW)? Both? (Please, give reasons for your answer, possibly
by making reference to the two women’s use of modal verbs).
4. Could you find in this exchange any of the four factors identified by Hofstede (1983), determining crosscultural discrepancies (i.e.: 1. Power Distance; 2. Uncertainty Avoidance; 3. Individualism/Collectivism; 4.
Masculinity/Femininity)? (Please, give reasons for your answer).
265